Peru  and  Chile 


THE  QUESTION  OF  TARAPACA 


■■/■  } 


b ' 


Memorial  Address 

to 
President  Harding 


WASHINGTON,  D.  C. 
1922 


MEMORIAL  ADDRESS  TO 


PRESIDENT  HARDING 


BY 


THE  NATIVES  OF  TARAPACA 


F 
3&f7.  3 


To   His   Excellency  the  President  of  the   United 
States  of  America: 

The  undersigned  Peruvian  citizens,  born  in  the  Depart- 
ment of  Tarapaca,  which  is  today  under  the  control  of  Chile, 
appear  before  your  Excellency  to  respectfully  set  forth  the 
following: 

We  have  no  doubt  that,  in  the  conferences  which  at  your 
Excellency's  initiative  are  soon  to  be  held  in  Washington  for 
the  purpose  of  settling  the  differences  pending  between  Peru 
and  Chile  since  the  peace  of  1883,  the  Peruvian  Government 
will  exact  of  that  of  Chile  the  devolution  of  the  Department 
of  Tarapaca;  and  with  the  live  earnest  desire  that  the  Peru- 
vian demand  be  complied  with  and  we  the  natives  of  Tarapaca 
restored  to  the  Peruvian  home  which  we  have  never  re- 
nounced, nor  shall  ever  be  able  to  renounce,  by  this  communi- 
cation manifest  our  decided  and  unbreakable  will  cf  reestab- 
lishing our  union  with  the  Peruvian  Motherland  and  hereto 
annex  a  brief  containing  the  reasons  which  we  have  for  believ- 
ing our  decision  just.  All  to  the  end  of  lending  our  most  ve- 
hement cooperation  and  support  to  the  demand  of  the  Peru- 
vian Government. 

In  the  brief  just  mentioned  we  have  undertaken  to  prove 
and  believe  to  have  proved : 

First.  That  the  cession  of  Tarapaca  contained  in  the  treaty 
of  peace  of  1883  between  Peru  and  Chile  was  made  not  only 
without  consulting  the  will  of  its  inhabitants  but  against  their 
will  which  they  of  their  own  initiative  and  notwithstanding 
the  pressure  of  the  Chilean  arms  expressed  in  the  protest 
which  they  then  made  and  which  is  annexed  to  the  aforemen- 
tioned brief. 

Second.  That  the  natives  of  Tarapaca  as  well  as  the  other 
Peruvians  defended  our  territory  as  far  as  it  was  humanly 
possible,  and  were  conquered  only  because,  as  all  those  who 
have  studied  the  war  of  1879-1883,  and  especially  the  Chil- 
eans themselves,   acknowledge,  victory  was  certain   for   the 


belligerent  which  should  have  the  control  of  the  sea  which 
is  the  only  means  of  communication  and  on  which  Chile's 
superiority  was  from  the  beginning  unquestionable;  so  that  in 
spite  of  the  fruitless  sacrifice  of  Peru's  navy  men  the  weak 
Peruvian  navy  had  practically  disappeared  at  the  end  of  six 
months  of  hostilities,  and  the  extensive  Peruvian  coast  could 
be  attacked  with  impunity  whence  it  was  most  convenient 
for  the  invader. 

Third.  That  Tarapaca  not  having  been  an  object  of  the 
dispute  which  caused  the  war,  the  peace  with  which  the  latter 
ended  cannot  serve  as  a  title  to  appropriate  it  under  and  con- 
sequently the  expropriation  of  this  Peruvian  Department  by 
Chile  is  a  simple  despoliation  by  force  and  arms  which  does 
not  close  the  war  but  prepares  another. 

Fourth.  That  notwithstanding  the  foregoing,  and  in  spite 
of  the  careful  concealment  made  by  Chile  of  its  true  aims  in 
the  beginning,  it  is  today  indubitable  that  those  aims  were 
always  those  of  despoiling  Peru  of  the  territory  of  Tarapaca 
to  consummate  the  monopoly  of  the  saltpetre  and  of  the 
guano  of  which  it  had  already  despoiled  Bolivia,  and  that 
for  this  reason  the  war  had  no  admissible  and  confessable  aim 
in  the  light  of  the  international  law  of  South  America. 

Fifth.  That  in  the  case  contemplated  in  the  next  preced- 
ing paragraph  the  belligerent  which  wins  the  war  has  none 
of  the  rights  which  the  laws  of  war  grant  to  the  winner  and 
the  loser  has  the  right  of  recovering  that  which  it  has  lost  as 
soon  as  the  pressure  of  force  cease. 

Sixth.  That  the  right  to  which  the  next  two  preceding 
paragraphs  refer  would  be  lost  to  Peru  if  in  the  exercise  of 
full  liberty  and  under  the  flag  of  that  great  country,  it  should 
settle  its  affairs  with  Chile  without  including  among  them 
that  of  Tarapaca,  and  we  the  natives  of  Tarapaca  would  lose 
forever  the  never-abandoned  hope  of  being  restored  to  the 
Peruvian  Motherland. 


Seventh.  That  the  saltpetre  and  the  guano  of  Tarapaca 
are  not  a  gift  made  by  nature  to  the  Peruvians,  but  the 
necessary  compensation  of  the  sterility  of  the  Peruvian  coast 
which  can  be  cultivated,  although  never  totally,  only  by 
means  of  costly  irrigations  whereas  the  long  coast  of  Chile  is 
all  irrigated  by  rain.  So  that  the  guano  and  the  saltpetre, 
which  ought  to  remedy  or  make  up  for  the  sterility  of  the 
Peruvian  coast  serve  Chile  only  to  constitute  what  is  in  fact 
a  most  abundant  fund  of  war,  of  diplomacy  and  of  propaganda 
with  which  it  has  destroyed  the  equilibrium  of  the  South 
Pacific,  has  sowed  perpetual  intranquility  in  the  South  Amer- 
ican continent  and  constantly  causes  discredit  and  ruin  to 
those  who  resist  or  refuse  support  to  its  imperialistic  plans. 

Eighth.  That  Chile  has  violated  the  treaty  of  peace  which 
contains  the  cession  of  Tarapaca  in  what  was  indispensable 
condition  of  its  execution  by  Peru  and  has  caused  the  caducity 
of  said  treaty  and  of  the  cession  of  Tarapaca  even  supposing 
that  the  latter  should  have  been  valid  originally. 

Ninth.  Finally,  that  if  Tarapaca  should  remain  definitively 
annexed  to  Chile,  Bolivia  would  lose  forever  the  supreme 
hope  of  having  an  outlet  to  the  sea  because  the  realization  of 
that  hope  is  conceivable  only  through  one  of  the  ports  to  the 
south  of  Tarapaca  and  to  the  north  of  Chile  as  it  was,  and 
would  result  consequently  in  a  gap  in  the  present  Chilean 
territory  which  would  be  inadmissible  for  Chile.  It  is  clear, 
therefore,  that  the  compressed  and  unrestrainable  aspirations 
of  Bolivia  would  break  their  dikes  to  reach  the  sea  sometime, 
and  that  the  conference  which  with  such  wholesome  inten- 
tions your  Excellency  has  promoted  would  leave  in  the  ground 
the  seed  of  a  new  South  American  conflagration. 

Aware  of  the  decisive  influence  which  your  Excellency's 
ideas  are  bound  to  have  in  the  decisions  which  the  conference 
adopt,  we  very  respectfully  fervently  invoke  the  high  spirit 
of  benevolence  and  of  justice  which  has  guided  your  Excel- 


lency  in  the  present  occasion,  and  your  natural  earnest  desire 
that  peace  be  definitively  established  in  the  South  American 
continent  that  you  may  deign  lend  attention  to  the  annexed 
brief  and  provide  whatever  you  may  deem  necessary  in  order 
that  the  reasons  which  it  contains  be  duly  appreciated  at  the 
conference  which  is  the  cause  of  it. 

Lima,  April  6,  1922. 

The  signatures  of  the  natives 
of  Tarapaca  follow. 


BRIEF  ON  THE  JUSTICE  AND  CONVENIENCE  OF 
THE  DEVOLUTION  TO  PERU  OF  THE  DEPART- 
MENT OF  TARAPACA  WHICH  APPEARS  CEDED 
TO  CHILE  BY  THE  TREATY  OF  PEACE  OF  OC- 
TOBER 20th,  1883. 

I.  The  Department  of  Tarapaca  which  with  its  beds  of  salt- 
petre and  of  guano  constitutes  an  emporium  of  wealth  was 
ceded  by  Peru  to  Chile,  the  opinion  of  its  inhabitants  not 
having  been  in  any  way  consulted,  by  the  treaty  of  peace  of 
October  20th,  1883.  The  inhabitants  of  Tarapaca  at  that 
time  numbered  forty- two  thousand  and  two  (42,002)  accord- 
ing to  the  official  census  of  Peru  of  1876.  Of  them  only 
two  thousand  were  foreigners.  They,  far  from  being  con- 
sulted, spontaneously  made  the  protest  a  copy  of  which  is 
annexed  hereto. 

In  the  European  continent,  the  change  of  nationality  of  a 
populated  country,  although  populated  by  a  small  number  of 
inhabitants  as  all  the  countries  of  South  America,  without 
consulting  the  opinion  of  its  inhabitants,  would  have  been  a 
scandal.  But  in  South  America  where  the  nationality  of  a 
piece  of  territory  has  for  the  first  time  been  seen  to  change, 
the  infraction  of  the  then  and  now  most  common  and  ac- 
cepted rules  in  the  civilized  world  set  a  precedent  which  it 
is  necessary  to  erase  from  the  annals  of  our  international  law. 

After  the  cession,  we,  the  natives  of  Tarapaca,  have  been 
treated  in  the  land  of  our  birth  as  the  natives  of  Tacna  and  of 
Arica  have  been  in  theirs  and  we  have  finally  been  expelled 
also  or  driven  away  as  they  have  been. 

The  grave  fact  of  our  not  having  been  consulted  does  not 
need  proofs  of  any  kind.  The  inhabitants  of  Tarapaca  deny 
that  they  were  consulted  and  therefore  it  is  in  no  case  up  to 


them  to  furnish  proof  but  it  is  up  to  whomsoever  should  af- 
firm the  contrary  to  produce  the  respective  proof  and  such 
proof  has  neither  been  offered  nor  mentioned  by  anyone. 

II.  The  inhabitants  of  Tarapaca,  prior  to  protesting,  de- 
fended their  own  territory  and  the  national  territory  as  did 
all  the  inhabitants  of  Peru,  and  it  seems  opportune  to  mani- 
fest on  this  occasion  why,  in  spite  of  their  efforts,  and  of  those 
of  all  the  inhabitants  of  the  country,  the  war  was  lost  and 
the  dismemberment  of  Peru  consummated  by  Chile. 

Among  the  communities  of  the  every  extensive  coast  of 
Peru  there  was  not  at  the  time  of  the  war  with  Chile,  and 
there  is  not  today,  any  means  of  communication  other  than 
the  sea;  so  that  the  belligerent  which  dominated  the  sea  had 
the  victory  assured.  And  that  belligerent  was  Chile  which 
prepared  the  despoliation  of  the  Bolivian  desert  of  Atacama 
and  the  Peruvian  Department  of  Tarapaca  since  the  year 
1842  when  the  saltpetre  and  the  guano  riches  of  the  former 
were  discovered. 

Many  volumes  might  be  filled  with  official  Chilean  docu- 
ments and  with  publications  of  the  Chilean  press  which  evi- 
dence the  unanimous  view  in  that  country,  as  well  as  the 
view  of  Peru,  and  in  general  of  all  those  who  have  studied 
the  problem,  to  prove  that  on  the  west  coast  of  South  America 
domination  of  the  sea  means  victory.  We  shall  limit  our- 
selves to  a  few  citations. 

Supposing  the  capture  of  the  Huascar,  the  last  ship  of  rela- 
tive importance  which  Peru  had,  Santa  Maria  (President  of 
the  Chilean  Council  of  Ministers — and  later  of  the  Republic) 
wrote  to  Sotomayor,  Chief  of  Staff  of  the  Chilean  army,  the 
following : 

"August  21,  1880.  The  disappearance  of  this  ship 
would  permit  us  to  move  our  army  immediately  and 
then  I  would  be  of  opinion — think  it  over  well — that 
we  should  direct  our  expedition  on  Lima  and  not  on 


Tarapaca.  The  moral  effect  which  the  capture  of 
Lima  would  produce  after  the  annihilation  of  the 
Peruvian  maritime  forces  would  be  immense.  You 
will  see  by  this  that  I  change  my  former  manner  of 
thinking  but  this  change  has  its  basis  in  that  I  con- 
sider the  Peruvian  navy  entirely  overwhelmed." 
Bulnes,  "Guerra  del  Pacifico,"  Vol.  1,  P.  508. 

Bulnes,  at  page  458,  Vol.  I,  referring  to  a  resolution  of 
the  Council  of  War  to  move  on  Arica,  writes : 

"A  great  event  modified  the  resolution  of  the  Coun- 
cil of  War:  the  capture  of  the  Huascar  which  took 
place  on  the  8th  of  this  month,  and  which  by  itself 
dispelled  all  the  doubts  .  .  .  ." 

At  page  501  he  adds  the  following: 

"The  capture  of  the  Huascar  awakened  immense 
interest  in  the  country.  The  public  instinct  under- 
stood the  enormous  importance  of  opening  the  doors 
of  Peru  to  the  terrestrial  invasion  which  would  decide 
the  contest  .  .  .  ." 

And  he  adds  at  page  504: 

"In  Peru  the  impression  was  much  greater;  first  of 
sorrow  for  the  loss  of  its  most  beloved  belonging. 
Grau  was  its  pride;  the  Huascar  its  glory!  Then  of 
consternation  at  the  impending  invasion.  The  whole 
coast  was  left  at  the  mercy  of  the  enemy.  It  could 
disembark  wheresoever  it  should  wish  .  .  .  ." 

As  regards  the  navies  of  Peru  and  of  Chile,  the  following 
comparative  statements  concerning  them  at  the  time  of  the 
declaration  of  the  war  which  appear  as  much  in  the  Peruvian 
as  in  the  Chilean  histories  prove  the  complete  superiority  of 
Chile's  navy  and  the  impossibility  of  a  definitive  victory  on 
the  sea  for  Peru. 


TONNAGE  OF  THE  NAVIES 


Peru 

Independencia 2004 

Huascar 1130 

Mancon 1034 

Atahualpa 1034 

Union 1150 

Pilcomayo 600 

6952 


Chile 

Cockrane 2032 

Blanco 2032 

Ohiggins 1101 

Chacabuco 1101 

Abatao 1051 

Esmeralda 854 

Magallanes 772 

Covadonga 412 


9353 


SPEED  AND  ARMOUR  OF  THEIR  SHIPS 


Manco 


4  mi.,  10  in. 


Atahualpa 

Independencia,}  n  mj  ^  in        B1 
Huascar 


Cockrane,  13  mi.,  13  in. 
13  mi.  13  in. 


anco, 


ARMAMENT  OF  THEIR  SHIPS 


Peru                       Grooved  Cannon 

Chile 

2 

<   250 

12 

2 

'    150 

1 

0 

'    115 

7 

26 

'     70 

4 

0 

'     64 

1 

4 

<     40 

8 

4 

'     32 

4 

0 

<     30 

4 

0 

'     20 

8 

4 

<     12 

0 

5 

<       9 

4 

0 

<       6 

6 

DATE  OF  CONSTRUCTION  OF  THEIR  SHIPS 


Independencia 
Huascar 
Manco 
Atahualpa 


1864 


1874 


Cockrane 
Blanco 
Ohiggins 
Chacabuco 
Biblioteca  del  Mercurio  Peruano 
Documentos   Esenciales  del   Debate   Peruano  Chileno" 
published  by  the  Comite  Patriotico  Peruano, 
Series  A.— Vol.  2,  Pp.  67  and  68. 


10 


III.  The  treaty  of  peace  of  October  20th,  1883,  in  its 
second  article,  there  being  no  prior  nor  subsequent  explana- 
tion of  or  reference  to  the  subject  matter  of  this  article,  reads 
as  follows: 

"Article  2.  The  Republic  of  Peru  cedes  to  the  Re- 
public of  Chile,  perpetually  and  unconditionally,  the 
territory  of  the  literal  province  of  Tarapaca,  the 
boundaries  of  which  are:  on  the  north,  the  ravine  and 
river  Camarones;  en  the  south  the  ravine  and  river 
Loa;  on  the  east,  the  Republic  of  Bolivia  and  on  the 
west  the  Pacific  Ocean." 

When  Chile  declared  war  on  Peru  on  the  5th  of  April, 
1879,  Minister  Fierro  alleged,  in  his  manifesto  to  the  neutral 
powers,  as  the  only  cause  of  the  war  the  execution  by  Peru 
and  Bolivia  of  the  secret  treaty  of  1873,  basing  his  allegation 
on  the  fact  that,  Bolivia  having  declared  war  on  Chile  be- 
cause Chile  (without  having  declared  it  as  it  was  its  duty 
to  do)  had  occupied  Bolivian  territory,  Peru  being  the  ally 
of  Bolivia  ought  to  be  reputed  an  enemy  of  Chile  also  and 
besides  disloyal  to  Chile  because  of  having  kept  the  treaty 
secret  while  appearing  as  a  neutral  and  friend  of  Chile  and 
as  a  mediator  between  it  and  Bolivia.  But  the  manifesto 
does  not  contain  a  word  about  Tarapaca  although  it  does  not 
fail  to  express  hateful  sentiments  against  Peru  on  account  of 
certain  internal  administration  measures  which  the  latter 
took  in  the  saltpetre  fields  of  that  territory  and  which  Chile 
believed  prejudicial  to  Chilean  interests  the  importance  of 
which  the  minister  exaggerated  immeasureably. 

War  is  certainly,  or  was  until  the  last  European  conflict,  a 
licit  manner  of  determining  disputes  between  nations  in  the 
absence  of  any  other  means  of  doing  so.  But  war  has  never 
been  considered,  at  least  among  Christian  people,  during 
modern  times  and  above  all  in  America,  as  a  means  of  appro- 
priating territories  and  even  property  of  any  other  kind  not 

11 


related  to  the  causes  of  the  war  itself.  So  that  if  a  territory 
which  was  never  in  dispute,  and  especially  if  it  contains 
riches  as  stupendous  as  does  Tarapaca,  is  ceded,  such  cession 
has  no  legitimate  cause ;  it  is  simply  a  despoliation  by  force 
and  arms  which  the  vanquished  consent  to  because  he  cannot 
repel  the  force  which  weighs  down  upon  him.  And  as  no 
despoliation,  and  especially  those  effected  by  force,  gives  title 
to  the  things  thus  taken,  it  seems  evident  that  Chile  has  no 
title  to  the  province  of  Tarapaca.  Consequently  Peru  has 
an  indisputable  title  to  that  province  and  may  exercise  it  by 
force  whenever  it  be  strong  enough  to  defeat  Chile  or  by 
means  of  pacific  action  founded  on  reason  and  on  mutual 
convenience  to  which  the  actual  tendencies  of  humanity  which 
the  Government  of  that  great  Republic  so  brilliantly  personi- 
fies give  a  power  which  they  did  not  formerly  have. 

War  taking  the  place  of  a  tribunal  of  last  resort  to  deter- 
mine to  whom  belongs  the  object  of  a  dispute  between  two 
or  more  states  is  already  sufficiently  barbarous  and  horrible 
to  suppose  that  its  effects  may  be  extended  to  objects  which 
had  no  relation  with  it,  thus  retrograding  to  the  times  when 
the  conqueror  was  the  owner  of  all  that  belonged  to  the  con- 
quered including  honor,  liberty  and  life. 

Even  in  Europe  composed  of  different  races  which  came 
into  contact  with  each  other  through  invasion  and  war,  whose 
organization  was  originally  founded  on  rules  of  individual  and 
absolute  predominance  and  whose  territories  are  far  from  be- 
ing sufficiently  extensive  not  to  inspire  covetousness,  the  ap- 
propriation of  another's  property  among  nations  may  be  con- 
sidered definitely  abolished. 

The  cession  of  Alsace  and  Lorraine  offers  in  Europe  the 
last  example  of  the  past  barbarousness  and  it  is  certain  that 
the  world  would  not  permit  today  that  such  an  example  should 
be  repeated  nor  would  it  have  been  possible  to  found  a  League 
of  Nations  if  it  should  subsist. 

12 


How  much  more  must  it  be  so  in  South  America  where  the 
states  were  born  to  the  independent  life  under  the  ideas  of  the 
Christian  civilization  of  the  ninteenth  century. 

There  are  further  in  the  case  of  Tarapaca  compared  with 
that  of  Alsace  and  Lorraine  these  differences  which  favor 
Peru:  Alsace  and  Lorraine  once  belonged  to  the  Germanic 
community,  Chile  certainly  was  once  a  dependency  of  Peru 
but  Peru  was  never  part  of  Chile.  The  two  states  were  not 
even  boundary  neighbors.  Between  the  river  Loa,  the  south- 
ern boundary  of  Peru  and  of  the  Department  of  Tarapaca, 
and  the  river  Paposo,  northern  boundary  of  Chile,  there  is 
the  entire  Bolivian  desert  enclosed  by  its  sea  and  its  moun- 
tains, so  that  Chile  has  had  to  take  a  leap  of  eighty  leagues  to 
place  its  claw  on  the  coveted  Peruvian  prey,  a  prey  which  is 
not  only  a  territory  susceptible  of  being  made  productive 
with  the  money  and  work  of  the  conqueror  but  a  treasure  in 
itself  immense,  indispensable  for  Peru  as  we  shall  hereinafter 
show  and  with  which  Chile  passed  instantaneously,  the  only 
example  in  history,  from  the  most  modest  sphere  to  the  most 
ostentatious  opulence. 

The  Chileans  also  know  what  they  were  doing  when,  while 
directing  their  arms  on  Tarapaca  in  the  year  1879,  they  were 
not  content  with  concealing  their  purposes  but  protested  once 
and  again  that  they  were  not  nor  could  be  those  of  conquest. 
The  same  manifesto  of  Minister  Fierro  as  to  the  justificative 
causes  of  the  war  to  which  we  have  referred  proves  this  affir- 
mation. 

"In  no  emergency,"  says  the  Minister,  "was  it  possible  to 
anticipate  that  Chile  or  any  other  nation  could  threaten  the 
integrity  of  the  Bolivian  territory  or  the  never-disputed 
sovereignty  of  Peru  within  its  acknowledged  boundaries." 
By  this  Chile  wished  to  express  the  thought  that  the  conquest 
(which  was  precisely  what  it  was  performing)  was,  in  its 
opinion  a  thing  so  excessively  monstrous  that  no  one  could 

13 


imagine  it  and  that  it  could  not  therefore  have  been  the  cause 
of  the  treaty  of  alliance  of  1873  between  Peru  and  Bolivia. 
Because  Chile  was  trembling  at  the  idea  of  an  intervention 
by  the  United  States  or  by  Europe  and  wished  to  prevent  it 
with  the  boldest  protests  against  the  conquest  to  which  never- 
theless it  rapidly  was  tending. 

The  idea  expressed  by  the  Chilean  Minister  in  the  fore- 
going quotation  explains  it  all.  Peru  and  Bolivia  seeing  in 
the  reality  of  the  invasions  of  the  Bolivian  desert  the  begin- 
ning of  the  conquest  were  not  sufficiently  alarmed  and  lim- 
ited themselves  to  a  semi-platonic  alliance  which  was  not  even 
completed  with  the  projected  concurrence  of  the  Argentine 
Republic  and  which  was  in  fact  abandoned,  as  all  other  de- 
fense was  forgotten,  when  Chile  apparently  settled  with 
Bolivia  by  means  of  the  boundary  treaty  of  1874  by  which 
nothing  better  was  accomplished  than  by  that  of  1866  whence 
the  great  dispute  of  those  times  had  originated,  and  which 
furnished  immediate  pretext  for  the  invasion  of  the  entire 
Bolivian  desert. 

This  idea  explains  also  that  all  the  other  states  of  America 
should  not  have  understood  the  situation  in  time  to  check 
the  belligerent  action  of  Chile  in  its  inception  and  should 
have  let  things  advance  until  Chile  took  the  saltpetre  and 
guano  deposits  of  Tarapaca,  immediately  undertook  the  ex- 
ploitation of  them  and  acquired  powerful  elements  of  re- 
sistance against  the  intervention  of  any  state  of  South 
America. 

It  is  also  necessary  to  state  here  how  this  Republic  so  young 
and  so  poor  could  do  things  so  surprising  and  so  bold  with  a 
method  and  perserverance  which  are  conceivable  only  under 
the  direction  of  an  intelligence  and  an  arm  provided  with  the 
most  absolute  power. 

But  the  fact  is  that  it  is  an  oligarchy,  compact  and  closed, 
that  governs  in  Chile  under  the  forms  of  a  democratic  re- 

14 


public,  and  has  always  directed  its  interior  and  exterior 
policy,  doing  so  above  all  for  the  personal  benefit  of  its  mem- 
bers and  generally  with  disregard  of  the  inferior  races  of 
semi-civilized  rapacious  and  sanguinary  Indians  and  half- 
breeds  which  make  up  the  great  mass  of  its  population. 

The  above  stated  circumstance  is  sufficient  to  render  the 
Chilean  Republic  a  machinery  of  easy  and  energetic  move- 
ments in  the  service  of  far-reaching,  firm  and  constant  pur- 
poses. It  is  as  dangerous  in  South  America  as  was  the  Kai- 
ser's Germany  in  Europe  and  even  much  more  dangerous: 
First,  because  it  is  sufficiently  separated  from  the  rest  of  the 
world  to  withhold  from  the  latter's  eyes,  at  least  in  the  be- 
ginning, the  preparation  and  execution  of  its  purposes.  Sec- 
ond, because  the  dominant  caste  being  separated  from  the 
lower  masses  the  former  looks  upon  the  blood  of  the  latter 
with  less  attachment  and  solicitude,  and  because  the  char- 
acter of  the  lower  masses  makes  them  very  appropriate  for 
the  war  of  destruction  and  very  easy  to  control  at  the  expense 
of  the  enemy  by  permitting  them  to  satisfy  their  brutal  in- 
stincts. The  excesses  of  all  kinds  committed  against  the 
defenseless  Peru  after  the  disappearance  of  its  navy  are  un- 
equivocal proof  of  what  we  have  just  expressed  no  less  than 
the  persistence  in  the  purpose  of  the  upper  classes  regarding 
the  saltpetre  and  guano  of  Bolivia  and  of  Peru.  This  leads 
us  to  the  demonstration  that  in  spite  of  Minister  Fierro's 
manifesto  it  was  the  riches  of  Tarapaca  that  caused  the  war 
against  Peru. 

IV.  When  President  Bulnes,  acquainted  with  the  discov- 
ery of  guano  and  saltpetre  to  the  north  of  the  twenty-fourth 
degree  where  Bolivia's  ownership  of  the  desert  was  unques- 
tionable, proposed  to  the  Chilean  Congress  the  adoption  of  a 
law  which  fixed  the  northern  boundary  of  Chile  at  the  twenty- 
third  degree,  advancing  towards  the  north  more  than  two 
geographical  degrees  above  the  river  Paposo  up  to  that  time 

15 


the  unquestionable  boundary  of  Chile  acknowledged  as  such 
in  its  Constitution,  Congress  adopted  that  law  without  dis- 
cussion and  unanimously,  that  law  which,  applied  by  the 
Chilean  government  with  care,  cunning  and  perseverance 
never  before  seen,  produced  in  the  end  the  catastrophe  of  1879 
which  annihilated  the  economic  forces  of  Peru,  deprived 
Bolivia  of  its  sea  coast  and  converted  Chile  from  the  poorest 
nation  of  the  South  Pacific  into  the  wealthiest  of  the  republics 
of  that  region. 

Don  Gonzalo  Bulnes,  son  of  the  Chilean  President  of  1842, 
and  historian  of  the  War  of  the  Pacific  relates  as  follows  the 
remotest  origin  of  the  terrible  drama: 

"The  new  republics  adopted  as  a  common  basis  for 
the  demarcation  of  their  boundaries  the  administrative 
boundary  which  they  had  at  the  moment  of  their 
separation  from  Spain.  This  was  called  the  'uti  pos- 
sidetis of  1810'  and  was  thought  of  largely  to  prevent 
European  nations  from  pretending  to  set  foot  on 
America  alleging  that  between  the  territory  of  one 
nation  and  that  of  another  there  were  vacant  lands 
subject  to  occupation  as  res  nullius." 

"The  uti  possidetis  of  1810  was  the  juridical  be- 
ginning of  the  territorial  demarcation  among  the 
American  states."  • 

"Bulnes*  government  has  the  merit  of  having  en- 
deavored to  establish  the  boundaries  of  the  republic 
on  the  north  and  south  before  any  of  the  other  govern- 
ments of  America  endeavored  to  establish  theirs,  thus 
preparing  with  rare  foresight  for  the  Chilean  race  of 
the  future  a  territory  adequate  for  its  ambitions  of 
work  and  of  expansion." 

"Within  one  year,  between  1842  and  1843,  he  fixed 
the  northern  boundary  of  the  country  at  the  Mejil- 
lones  parallel,  and  on  the  south  at  the  Strait  of  Magel- 
lan founding  a  colony  which  was  then  named  Fuerte 
Bulnes  today  Punta  Arenas." 

"This  book  is  not  concerned  with  what  regards  the 
Strait.     It  is  concerned  only  with  that  which  refers 

16 


to  the  northern  domain  up  to  Mejillones  because  of 
its  having  been  the  starting  point  of  the  boundary  dis- 
pute between  Chile  and  Bolivia,  the  seed  of  the  bloody 
and  prolonged  struggle  which  I  propose  to  narrate." 

"Great  deposits  of  guano  were  discovered  in  Peru 
in  1842  and,  although  the  enormous  importance  which 
this  fertilizer  came  to  acquire  as  regards  the  public 
wealth  of  this  country  could  not  then  be  foreseen, 
sufficient  was  known  to  appreciate  it  as  a  source  of  fis- 
cal wealth.  The  government  of  Chile  sent  a  com- 
mission to  explore  the  coasts  of  the  northern  part  of 
the  country  up  to  the  Mejillones  parallel  for  the  pur- 
pose of  ascertaining  whether  or  not  similar  deposits 
existed  on  them.  The  report  was  not  very  favorable. 
The  guano  found  was  neither  abundant  nor  of  high 
quality.  Bulnes  nevertheless  took  that  examination 
as  a  basis  to  send  a  message  to  Congress  proposing  to 
it  a  project  of  law  which  declared  the  guano  deposits 
situated  to  the  south  of  the  twenty-third  parallel  the 
property  of  the  republic  by  reason  of  their  being  within 
the  boundaries  of  its  territory." 
"The  message  read  as  follows :" 
"Fellow  citizens  of  the  Senate  and  of  the  Chamber 
of  Deputies:" 

"The  usefulness  of  the  substance  called  guano  which 
since  time  immemorial  is  used  as  a  fertilizer  in  the  cul- 
tivation of  the  soil  on  the  coast  of  Peru  being  ac- 
knowledged in  Europe,  I  considered  it  necessary  to 
send  an  exploring  commission  to  examine  the  coast 
comprised  between  the  port  of  Coquimbo  and  the  bluff 
of  Mejillones  for  the  purpose  of  finding  out  whether 
or  not  any  guano  deposits  existed  within  the  territory 
of  the  republic  the  exploitation  of  which  might  supply 
a  new  source  of  income  to  the  public  treasury,  and, 
although  the  result  of  the  expedition  did  not  fully 
meet  the  hopes  which  had  been  conceived,  guano  was 
nevertheless  found,  in  more  or  less  abundant  quanti- 
ties according  to  the  nature  of  the  places  at  which 
these  deposits  are  found,  at  sixteen  points  of  the  coast 
and  neighboring  islands,  from  29'35"  to  23'6"  south 
latitude." 

17 


"Far  from  presuming,  after  the  examination  made 
that  the  Chilean  guano  deposits  may  have  the  import- 
ance attributed  to  those  of  Peru,  I  am  inclined  to  be- 
lieve that  the  return  that  may  be  derived  from  them 
shall  be  comparatively  small  but  this  would  not  excuse 
that  their  exploitation  should  be  permitted  to  be  free 
in  favor  of  foreign  commerce  depriving  the  national 
treasury  of  a  resource  which,  without  encumbrance  on 
the  people,  would  serve  as  a  subsidiary  fund  to  attend 
to  so  many  objects  of  common  utility  which  need  ef- 
ficient protection." 

"This  important  document  carries  the  signatures  of 
President  Don  Manuel  Bulnes  and  of  the  Secretary  of 
the  Treasury  (Ministro  de  Hacienda)  Don  Manuel 
Renjifo." 

"Both  Chambers  approved  unanimously  that  which 
this  message  indicated  and  the  project  was  promul- 
gated as  law  in  October  1842.  That  the  northern 
boundary  of  the  republic  was  the  Bay  of  Mejillones 
was  sanctioned  by  the  Executive  and  by  Congress  un- 
der the  form  of  an  economic  measure."  Bulnes, 
"Guerra  del  Pacifico"  Vol.  I,  Pages  12,  13,  14. 

The  foregoing  proves  that  Chile  since  the  year  1842  had 
the  purpose  of  enriching  itself  by  the  appropriation  of  the 
guano  and  saltpetre  producing  territories  and  that  to  put  it 
into  practice  it  did  not  retreat  before  the  unequivocal  provi- 
sions of  its  constitution  which  fixed  its  boundary  precisely  at 
the  southern  beginning  of  those  territories  nor  before  the  con- 
flict with  Bolivia  which  the  law  of  the  year  above  mentioned 
could  create  and  in  fact  did  create.  The  foregoing  also 
proves  that  with  the  indubitable  object  of  concealing  the 
transcendence  of  that  law  it  was  proposed  to  the  Chambers 
as  a  simple  economic  measure  and  adopted  by  them  as  such 
without  discussion  that  we  know  of  and  unanimously. 

This  and  the  fact  that  Chile's  activities  regarding  the  salt- 
petres and  guanos  did  not  cease  until  it  obtained  the  absolute 
domination  of  them  all,  Bolivian  as  well  as  Peruvian,  cannot 


leave  doubt  in  any  impartial  mind  that  the  cause  of  the  war 
was  the  Chilean  purpose  of  appropriating  the  province  of 
Tarapaca  and  that  the  manifesto  of  Minister  Fierro,  in  so  far 
as  it  states  that  the  cause  of  the  war  was  the  secret  treaty  of 
alliance  between  Bolivia  and  Peru  executed  in  1873,  was  only 
a  recourse  resorted  to  by  the  public  men  of  Chile  in  the 
absence  of  all  serious  pretext  for  carrying  it  on  at  the  moment 
when  they  thought  that  the  most  propitious  occasion  presented 
itself  for  accomplishing  the  long  incubated  project  of  Presi- 
dent of  Bulnes  of  the  year  1842. 

It  would  be  very  long  and  foreign  to  the  purpose  of  this 
document  to  demonstrate  that  the  alliance  between  Peru  and 
Bolivia  of  1873  cannot  be  the  cause  of  the  war  declared  by 
Chile  on  the  former  of  these  two  countries.  It  is  sufficient 
for  our  purpose  to  demonstrate  in  a  direct  manner  that  it  was 
the  saltpetre  of  Tarapaca  that  was  the  only  cause  which 
induced  Chile  to  declare  this  war,  and  in  the  event  that  any- 
one should  believe  that  what  has  heretofore  been  stated  is  not 
sufficient  for  that  purpose,  we  add  the  following  the  proba- 
tory force  of  which  is  beyond  discussion : 

''The  war  with  Bolivia  was  for  this  reason  a  simple 
question  of  time  from  the  time  when  the  explorer 
Cangalla  found  the  first  silver  ore  in  the  hills  of  Cara- 
coles (of  the  desert  of  Atacama),  as  the  war  with 
Peru  would  have  to  be  inevitable  and  analogous  from 
the  time  when  the  railroad  and  saltpetre  excavation 
attracted  to  the  territory  of  that  republic,  as  a  human 
avalanche,  an  active,  vigorous  and  intelligent  race 
which  was  to  meet  face  to  face  an  other  race  lazy, 
soft  and  demoralized  by  the  climate  and  by  idleness." 
Vicuna  Mackena  "Campafia  de  Tarapaca"  P.  33. 

Balmaceda,  Secretary  of  State,  in  the  year  1882  and  later 
president  of  Chile,  said  in  the  Chamber  of  Deputies: 

"Historical,  legendary,  geographical  and  industrial 
reasons  made  it  necessary  to  carry  the  war  on  to  its  last 

19 


extreme.  On  the  Pacific  coast  of  South  America 
there  are  but  two  centres  of  action  and  progress :  Lima 
and  Callao:  Santiago  and  Valparaiso.  It  is  necessary 
that  one  of  these  centres  succumb  in  order  that  the 
other  may  rise.  For  our  part  we  need  Tarapaca  as  a 
source  of  wealth  and  Arica  as  an  advanced  point  on 
the  coast." 

Paz  Soldan  Carlos,  "La  cuestion  de  Tacna  v 
Arica,"  P.  28. 

In  a  circular  to  the  diplomatic  agents  of  Chile,  Balmaceda 
was  still  more  explicit: 

"The  saltpetre  territory  of  Antofagasta  and  the 
saltpetre  territory  of  Tarapaca  were  the  real  and  di- 
rect cause  of  the  war.  To  return  to  the  enemy  the 
cause  itself  of  the  war  after  our  triumphs  and  after  the 
occupation  of  those  territories  would  have  been  an 
unjustifiable  imprevision  and  an  absolute  lack  of  the 
knowledge  which  matters  of  state  suppose."  Ibidem, 
Page  29. 

Vial  Solar  referring  to  the  terms  of  the  peace  says: 

"In  clearer  terms  and  according  to  this  criterion, 
Peru  submitting  to  the  law  of  the  situation  ought 
to  deliver  to  Chile  those  portions  of  territory 
which  had  been  the  true  and  efficient  cause  of  the 
war  and  to  pay  besides  an  indemnity  in  money 
which  would  prevent  for  long  years  the  nourish- 
ment of  illusions  of  revenge  by  its  restless  poli- 
ticians." 

VJal  Solar,  "Paginas  Diplomaticas"  P.  7. 

The  following  is  copied  from  the  Biblioteca  del  Mercurio 
Peruano's  "Documentos  Esenciales  del  Debate  Peruano- 
Chileno"  Series  A,  Vol.  2: 

"D.  33. — The  conquest  confessed  in  the  Chilean 
Chamber." 

"Mr.  Arteaga  A.  (don  D.)  requests  the  privilege 
of  speaking  for  the  purpose  of  proposing  to  the 

20 


Chamber  a  project  of  law  in  his  opinion  very  well 
founded  and  which  counts  with  the  approval  of  the 
entire  country." 

"Our  territory  has  extended  to  the  seventeenth 
degree  thanks  to  the  brave  effort  of  our  valiant 
army." 

"Our  poor  'rotos'  have  gone  to  take  possession 
of  that  territory  to  which  they  have  given  life  with 
their  arms  and  with  their  efforts  at  the  same  time 
that  our  capitalists  have  developed  industry  there." 

"In  view  of  this  and  other  considerations  he 
proposes  the  following:" 

"Project  of  resolution. — The  Chamber  of  Depu- 
ties would  see  with  pleasure  that  His  Excellency  the 
President  of  the  republic  should  submit  to  Congress 
a  project  of  law  to  definitively  incorporate  in  the 
territory  of  the  republic  the  regions  CONQUERED 
and  occupied  by  the  arms  of  Chile  in  the  present 
war,  said  regions  remaining  subject  to  the  civil, 
political  and  administrative  legislation  of  Chile." 

"Mr.  Walker  Martinez  (don  C.)  believes  the  idea 
proposed  by  Mr.  Arteaga  very  acceptable  and  very 
valiant  and  that  it  honors  the  country." 

"The  administrative  and  jurisdictional  measures 
would  be  settled  by  the  indication  of  the  honorable 
deputy." 

"Mr.  Balmaceda  (don  J.  M.)  confesses  that  he 
agrees  with  the  honorable  Mr.  Arteaga  on  every- 
thing that  may  refer  to  the  RIGHT  OF  CON- 
QUEST which  aids  Chile:  but  it  seems  to  him  that 
this  is  not  the  opportune  hour  to  proceed  to  the 
declaration  which  His  Excellency  requests.  For 
that  reason  he  will  deny  him  his  vote." 

"(Session  of  the  Chamber  of  Deputies  of  Chile 
of  the  5th  of  January,  1880)." 

The  events  to  which  we  have  referred  in  connection  with 
the  discovery  of  the  guano  and  saltpetre  in  the  Bolivian  de- 
sert ;  the  long  controversy  with  Bolivia  which  ended  in  the 
year  1866  when  Chile  wrested  from  an  insane  dictator  of 
Bolivia  the  treaty  of  that  year  and  proposed  to  help  him  to 

21 


conquer  the  southern  provinces  of  Peru  in  exchange  for  the 
whole  desert  of  Atacama;  the  secret  negotiations  of  Chile 
for  an  alliance  with  Ecuador  and  against  Peru  its  ally  at  the 
time  of  the  war  against  Spain;  the  treaty  of  1874  which  far 
from  remedying  the  faults  of  that  of  the  year  1866  placed 
new  obstacles  in  Bolivia's  way,  and  finally  the  futile  pretexts 
based  on  this  treaty  of  1874  which  Chile  alleged  to  take  pos- 
session of  the  entire  desert  of  Atacama  without  declaration  of 
war  and  disregarding  the  arbitration  agreed  upon  with  Boli- 
via, thus  constituting  itself  by  one  step  the  boundary  neigh- 
bor of  Peru  and  thereupon  calling  the  latter  country  to  ac- 
count and  declaring  the  war  for  the  supposed  offense  of  the 
defensive  alliance  of  the  year  1873  with  Bolivia  entered  into 
to  prevent  the  appropriation  of  the  saltpetre  of  both  by  Chile, 
this  appropriation  being  precisely  the  result  of  that  war  which 
the  latter  country  imposed  upon  them:  all  this  constitutes  a 
very  logical  association  of  links  in  the  long  chain  of  incidents 
of  all  kinds  brought  about  by  Chile  to  make  both  ends  meet, 
these  ends  being  the  Chilean  law  of  the  year  1842  and  the 
despoliation  of  the  saltpetre  deposits  of  Peru  and  of  Bolivia 
in  the  war  of  1879  to  1883.  To  this  is  added  the  most  elo- 
quent circumstance  as  regards  Chilean  psychology,  that  both 
measures  were  unanimously  approved  by  the  Chilean  Cham- 
bers. 

The  condition  which  the  Chilean  Treasury  had  reached  in 
1879  as  a  result  of  its  immeasurable  war  preparations  did  not 
permit  delay  in  the  realization  of  the  war  enterprise  which 
the  Chilean  statesmen  had  in  view  and  this  determined  the 
outbreak  in  that  year  of  the  so  long  meditated  war. 

The  obligations  arising  from  the  Chilean  debt,  which  up 
to  the  year  1842  had  not  been  fulfilled  with  regularity,  were 
henceforth  and  until  the  declaration  of  war  on  Peru  fulfilled 
with  noteworthy  punctuality,  not  because  Chile  had  the  re- 
sources for  that  purpose  but  because  it  had  its  aim  fixed  on 

22 


the  great  enterprise  which  it  had  undertaken.  Each  time 
that  its  resources  were  lacking  and  that  there  was  danger 
of  the  non-fulfillment  of  the  obligations  arising  from  a  loan, 
it  negotiated  another. 

Finally  the  time  arrived  when  it  was  not  possible  to  con- 
tinue securing  loans  for  the  purpose  of  performing  the  obliga- 
tions arising  from  other  loans,  and  this  was  undoubtedly  one 
of  the  capital  reasons  that  caused  the  war  to  break  out  when 
in  any  other  country  the  result  of  checking  it  would  have 
been  produced.  But  in  Chile  the  war  was  the  industry  itself 
and  it  was  necessary  to  make  it  produce. 

We  copy  from  Bulnes,  Vol.  1,  P.  184. 

"The  situation  of  the  treasury  was  extremely 
grave,  the  country  was  undergoing  a  very  grave 
fiscal  and  particular  crisis." 

"  Paper  had  been  established  during  the  preceding 
year  as  compulsory  currency  under  the  form  of  in- 
convertible bank  bill  and  the  weight  of  our  money 
was  worth  thirty  pennies." 

"The  budget  of  the  nation's  expenses  fluctuated 
in  the  neighborhood  of  twenty-one  million  pesos 
and  the  revenues  did  not  reach  more  than  seven- 
teen million  leaving  a  deficit  equivalent  to  almost 
twenty-five  percent  of  the  income  which  was  liqui- 
dated by  means  of  loans.  For  the  first  time  since 
1843  when  the  fulfillment  of  the  obligation  arising 
from  the  external  debt  became  regular,  in  1878  Chile 
found  itself  in  serious  difficulties  to  effect  the  pay- 
ment of  interests  in  Europe.  In  1877  the  loan  to 
cover  the  budget  amounted  to  five  million  pesos, 
in  1878  to  four  million,  and  there  was  a  new  deficit 
in  the  appropriations  of  the  Secretary  of  the 
Treasury  (Ministro  de  Hacienda)  of  almost  one 
million  pesos  more." 

At  page  377  of  the  same  volume: 

"The  General  made  the  error  of  causing  it  to  be 
believed  that  everything  was  ready  for  the  cam- 

23 


paign  when  it  was  not.  That  error  resulted  from 
his  not  having  studied  sufficiently  the  available 
resources  nor  the  preparations  which  were  neces- 
sary. Proceeding  thus  he  encouraged  illusions 
which  could  not  be  realized  and  which  produced  a 
disillusionment  painful  in  proportion  to  the  desire 
of  finishing  an  enterprise  which  was  exhausting  the 
resources  of  the  country.  In  this  contrast  of  hopes 
and  disillusionments  is  found  one  of  the  causes  of 
the  disagreement  which  existed  between  the  Gov- 
ernment and  him." 

At  pages  450  and  451  of  the  same  volume: 

"The  maintenance  and  payment  of  a  large  army 
distributed  throughout  the  country  with  a  powerful 
nucleus  at  a  place  unprovided  with  supplies  such  as 
Antofagasta  and  the  maintenance  and  payment  of  a 
navy  in  action  were  greater  than  the  economic 
forces  of  the  republic.  The  fiscal  resources, 
although  invested  with  scrupulous  economy  became 
insufficient  to  attend  to  the  war." 

"Matte,  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  (Ministro 
de  Hacienda),  on  whom  falls  the  greater  part  of 
the  honor  of  this  parsimonious  investment  of  the 
fiscal  revenues,  was  terrified  at  the  prospect  of  the 
prolongation  of  the  war,  and  it  is  probable  that  his 
influence  should  have  determined  the  change  of 
opinion  which  is  observed  in  the  Ministry  during 
the  first  fortnight  of  September  when  the  navy  was 
ready  to  sail  from  Valparaiso.  Matte  expressed 
himself  thus: 

"To  Sotomayor;  September  9.  As  the  matter  of 
revenues  is  that  which  is  most  closely  related  to  the 
war,  I  wish  to  express  to  you  my  opinion  of  the 
situation.  As  you  know  we  have  a  fiscal  issue  of 
twelve  thousand  million  pesos  already  authorized. 
The  market  circulation  cannot  demand  a  sum  much 
greater  than  that.  When  the  last  six  millions  be 
exhausted  it  shall  be  necessary  to  resort  to  other 
means  different  from  those  which  we  have  hitherto 
employed,  means  which  will  of  course  be  infinitely 

24 


more  painful  for  the  country.  Hence  the  necessity 
of  giving  the  most  vigorous  impulse  to  the  operations 
of  the  war.  In  my  judgment  it  is  indispensable  to 
prepare  with  the  greatest  rapidity  in  all  the  ele- 
ments of  army  mobilization  in  order  to  operate  on 
land  immediately  whether  or  not  the  navy  obtain 
the  results  which  we  all  expect.  I  would  not  be  so 
concerned  as  to  the  rapidity  with  which  it  is 
necessary  to  proceed  if  it  were  not  that  the  country 
has  not  the  resources  to  sustain  a  prolonged  war." 
"September  26th.  I  have  had,  he  said  to  him  in 
another  letter,  the  pleasure  of  receiving  your 
esteemed  letter  in  which  you  state  that  you  share 
actively  the  idea  that  agitates  us  all  and  especially 
me,  namely,  that  of  finding  a  denouement  as  rapid 
as  happy.  I  say  especially  me  because  if  we  do 
not  soon  arrive  at  the  end  we  shall  not  have  any 
gold  which  is  already  gone,  nor  silver  which  has 
already  been  put  on  the  way,  nor  paper  which  is 
about  to  be  exhausted. 

At  page  452: 

"Santa  Maria  thought  in  the  same  manner: 
"September  19.  Two  words  about  our  purposes 
which  without  any  discrepancy  are  your  own.  We 
wish  that  the  army  be  completely  ready  to  move  so 
that,  whether  the  Peruvian  ships  be  beaten  or 
whether  they  conceal  themselves  and  place  them- 
selves in  a  situation  where  they  cannot  be  pursued, 
our  soldiers  may  be  able  to  dash  on  Tarapaca." 

At  pages  505  and  506: 

"The  expeditionary  army  had  embarked  on 
October  28th." 

"This  was  a  solemn  day  for  the  national  patriot- 
ism. The  heart  of  three  million  Chileans  vibrated 
in  unison  with  that  chosen  portion  of  them  which 
was  going  to  cement  the  future  of  Chile  on  the 
sacrifice  and  on  the  victory." 

At  page  521  we  find  Sotomayor's  proclamation: 
"You  will  return  he  said  to  them  with  the  con- 
sciousness, etc.,  of  having  opened   a  new  era  of 

25 


national  history  placing  the  peace,  the  industry  and 
the  prosperity  of  the  Fatherland  on  broad  and  in- 
superable basis." 

At  page  275: 

"After  the  battle  of  Tarapaca  the  General  in 
Chief  sent  military  detachments  to  several  points 
in  the  territory  to  gather  up  the  arms  of  those 
scattered  and  fugitive  to  prevent  small  groups  of 
armed  men  from  forming  which  would  obstruct  the 
work  on  the  saltpetre  deposits  which  were  the 
nation's  main  source  of  revenue  for  the  continua- 
tion of  the  war." 

The  straits  of  the  Chilean  treasury  are  an  explanation  of 
the  vehemence  displayed  by  Chile  to  take  possession  of  Tara- 
paca. But  they  are  not  the  only  one  nor  tell  of  the  hatred 
and  unnecessary  cruelty  with  which  the  war  was  carried  on. 
The  principal  explanation  lies  in  the  individual  interest 
which  a  large  number  of  important  Chileans  and  especially 
high  public  functionaries  among  whom  there  were  legislators 
and  ministers  had  in  the  matter.  We  limit  ourselves  in  this 
•connection  to  transcribe  the  following  note  from  page  87  of 
the  history  of  the  war  by  the  Peruvian  writer  Paz  Soldan: 

"We  have  before  us  the  tenth  Report  of  the  Salt- 
petres and  Railway  Company  of  Antofagasta 
corresponding  to  the  semester  running  from  the 
first  of  January  to  the  first  of  June  1877." 

"In  it  we  find  the  following  list  of  the  share- 
holders of  said  company  inserted  at  page  25." 

"The  underlined  names  are  those  of  Chilean 
public  men  now  in  official  positions." 

"First  Issue  A." 

"Mr.  Jose  Basterrica — Mrs.  Mariana  Brown  de 
Ossa — Mr.  Evaristo  del  Campo — Mr.  Maximo  del 
Campo — Enrique  Cood — Augustin  Edwards — Esco- 
bar y  Ca — Guillermo  Gibbs  y  Ca — Eliodoro  Gormaz — 
Mauricio  J.   Garces — Ramon   Guerrero — Jorje  2d 

26 


Huneus — Jorje  Hicks — Ambrosio  Olives — Fran- 
cisco Puelma — Federico  Puelma — Luis  Pereira — 
Santiago  Prado — Julian  Riesco — M.  Subercas- 
seaux — Cornelio  Saavedra  (Secretary  of  War) 
(Ministro  de  la  Guerra)  Rafael  Sotomayor — Miguel 
Jose  Urmeneta — Francisco  J.  Vergara — Jose 
Eugenio  Vergara — Antonio  Verax — Miguel  A. 
Varas — Santiago  J.  Velazquez — Julio  Zegers  (Secre- 
tary of  Justice)  (Ministro  dejusticia) — Enrique  J. 
Walker." 

"Second  Issue  B." 

"Antonio  Domingo  Bordes — Ernesto  Decombe — 
Escobar  y  Ca — Augustin  Edwards — L.  C.  Gal- 
lagher— Guillermo  Gibbs  y  Ca — Eliodoro  Gormaz — J. 
D. Hunter — C.  S.  Miller — Luis  Pereira — Uldericio 
Prado — Valentin  Saldias — Miguel  Saldias — Fede- 
rico Varela — Enrique  J.  Walker." 

"It  is  a  fact  that  Mr.  Alejandro  Fierro,  Secretary 
of  State  (Ministro  de  Relaciones  Exteriores)  was 
one  of  the  shareholders  as  is  evidenced  by  the 
following  document  published  in  the  Official  Daily 
of  Santiago:" 

"SUMMONS:— In  the  suit  by  the  sindic  of  the 
Chacabuco  de  Caracoles  against  don  Alejandro 
Fierro  to  enforce  the  latter's  liability  resulting  from 
the  assignment  made  by  him  of  certain  shares  of 
stock,  action  which  is  now  before  the  judge  of  first 
instance  don  Javier  Arlegui  Rodriguez,  the  Most 
Illustrious  Court  of  Appeals,  second  part,  has  on  the 
ninth  instant  provided  as  follows:  the  papers  on 
file  having  been  seen:  Don  Alejandro  Fierro  being 
absent  from  the  country  and  don  Gregorio  Munoz 
named  his  attorney  in  fact  at  pages  143,  not  having 
appeared  for  him,  serve  a  summons  on  the  afore- 
mentioned Gregorio  Munoz  by  means  of  edicts 
and  advertisements  in  the  daily  newspapers  and, 
if  he  do  not  appear  within  ten  days,  communicate 
whatever  may  be  provided  in  this  action  to  the 
defender  of  absent  parties  as  the  representative  of 
don  Alejandro  Fierro.  The  decision  of  fifth  instant 
at   pages    149  which    has   been   appealed    from   is 

27 


affirmed  in  so  far  as  not  contrary  to  this  order.  Sub- 
stitute the  paper  and  let  this  be  returned. — Abalos — 
Prats. — Gandarillas." 

"This  notice  is  given  for  the  legal  effects:  it  being 
stated  that  the  clerk  of  the  case  is  don  Jose  Maria 
Guzman." 

"The  foregoing  document  lends  itself  to  very 
grave  and  sad  reflections." 

"The  Secretary  of  State  (Ministro  de  Relaciones 
Exteriores)  who  has  pushed  Chile  into  the  war  against 
Peru  and  Bolivia  to  defend  the  miners  of  Anto- 
fagasta  and  Caracoles  is  now  found  to  be  involved 
in  a  liability  action;  he  absents  himself  to  carry  out 
a  diplomatic  mission  in  the  Argentine  Republic, 
according  to  what  he  says,  while  the  court  officers 
diligently  search  for  him;  his  attorney  in  fact  don 
Gregorio  Munoz  conceals  himself,  edicts  and 
advertisements  are  published  in  the  Chilean 
dailies,  including  the  Official  Daily,  and  it  is  ordered 
that  whatever  may  be  provided  by  the  court  be 
communicated  to  the  defender  of  absent  parties  in 
view  of  the  fact  that  neither  don  Alejandro  Fierro 
nor  his  attorney  in  fact  appeared  to  defend  the 
action  on  the  assignment." 

"Behold  here  then  the  thread  of  a  pecuniary  en- 
tanglement and  of  a  diplomatic  scandal  which  in- 
dubitably exhibits  the  causes  of  the  present  war  in  all 
their  nudity." 

"It  is  indubitable  also  that  the  greater  part  of  the 
private  shares  of  stock  have  been  already  bought  by 
the  house  of  Gibbs  there  remaining  in  Chilean  hands 
only  those  of  the  Ministers,  Senators,  Deputies  and 
other  personalities  of  official  rank." 

Finally,  there  enters  as  a  principal  factor  in  the  conditions 
of  the  war  which  we  have  pointed  out,  Chile's  fear  that  the 
United  States  or  the  great  European  powers  should  inter- 
vene in  it  and  should  wrest  from  it  the  coveted  prey.  Its  sit- 
uation was  truly  unsustainable  before  a  more  or  less  ener- 
getic intervention  because  it  was  neither  sufficiently  powerful 

28 


to  resist  nor  could  find  support  in  justice  for  it  was  outside 
of  all  the  rules  of  international  law. 

The  war  had  in  fact  ended  with  the  capture  of  the  Huas- 
car :  because  Peru  was  absolutely  vanquished  and  at  the  mercy 
of  Chile  and  the  latter  could  impose  on  it  all  the  conditions 
of  the  conqueror  without  needing  to  exert  any  effort;  because 
in  the  case  of  an  unlikely  resistance  by  Peru  it  was  sufficient 
for  Chile  to  blockade  all  its  coast  which  not  only  deprived 
Peru  of  all  its  resources  but  filled  Chile's  purse.  The  Chil- 
eans without  any  discrepancy  have  acknowledged  this  fact  am- 
ply confirming  the  theory  already  set  forth  that  whomsoever 
possesses  the  sea  that  bathes  the  coasts  of  the  two  belligerent 
countries  has  the  war  won. 

Why  then  did  Chile  not  impose  peace  and  why  instead  did 
it  undertake  a  terrestrial  campaign  which  would  sprinkle 
with  the  blood  of  its  own  sons  and  with  that  of  the  Peruvians 
besides,  the  practically  defenseless  land  of  the  latter? 

It  was  precisely  at  that  time  that  the  first  mediation  of  the 
functionaries  of  the  United  States  took  place.  That  media- 
tion is  related  in  all  its  details  by  the  same  Chilean  historian 
Bulnes  at  page  423  of  Vol.  I  and  the  result  of  it  was  that 
which  he  expresses  in  the  following  paragraph  at  page  425 : 

"The  president  and  the  cabinet  accepted  the  pro- 
posal regarding  Bolivia  but  not  so  Peru  and  the  first 
diplomatic  step  of  the  North  American  Secretary  of 
State  terminated.  The  text  of  the  Chilean  reply 
which  was  drawn  up  by  Varas  reads  as  follows: 

"Regarding  the  matters  with  Peru,  although  the 
bases  proposed  correspond  to  a  great  extent  to  the  ob- 
ject of  the  war,  the  disloyal  conduct  of  Peru  or  of  its 
government  in  preparing  for  the  war  at  the  same 
time  that  it  gave  Chile  signs  of  friendly  and  pacific 
sentiments  and  in  appearing  as  a  mediator  when  it  was 
bound  by  a  secret  treaty  of  alliance  with  Bolivia,  our 
enemy   at   that   time,    furnishes  just   motives   to   the 

29 


country  and  to  the  government  for  not  considering 
themselves  satisfied  with  the  solution  of  our  present 
questions  by  means  of  arbitration  and  to  exact  securi- 
ties that  in  the  future  Peru  will  not  execute  treaties 
such  as  that  of  February  1873  which  it  has  main- 
tained secret  during  six  years  awaiting  doubtless  the 
occasion  of  being  our  aggressor  to  advantage — a  treaty 
which  strictly  considered  did  not  bind  it  to  make 
war — if  we  do  not  wish  to  run  the  serious  risk  of  re- 
maining subject  to  a  permanent  threat  to  our  exter- 
nal security  and  to  being  always  prepared  to  repel  it." 

The  pretexts  of  Minister  Varas  to  practically  reject  the 
mediation  as  regards  Peru,  he  having  accepted  it  as  regards 
Bolivia  which  country  in  the  opinion  of  Chile,  had  provoked 
the  war,  cannot  naturally  be  taken  seriously.  The  true  ex- 
planation of  this  is  that  Chile  was  still  concealing  that  it  had 
already  obtained  from  Bolivia  all  that  it  had  desired,  that  is, 
the  entire  desert  of  Atacama  with  all  its  riches  while  Peru 
still  possessed  the  province  of  Tarapaca  with  its  riches.  And 
this  was  Chile's  principal  objective. 

It  was  necessary,  against  wind  and  tide,  to  take  Tarapaca 
within  the  least  possible  time  and  to  check  in  the  meantime 
all  intervention  until  Chile  should  be  able  to  allege  as  a  title, 
possession  and  the  blood  of  its  sons  shed  to  obtain  it. 

The  Chilean  army,  therefore,  embarked  at  Antofagasta  and 
landed  at  Pisagua  notwithstanding  the  heroic  opposition  of 
the  small  Peruvian  garrison;  it  thus  cut  Peru's  line  of  de- 
fense and  thereupon  marched  on  the  bulk  of  the  Peruvian 
army  of  Tarapaca  which  was  reduced  in  numbers  by  the 
absence  of  three  thousand  Bolivians  whom  President  Daza 
caused  to  counter-march  at  the  best  opportunity  so  that  they 
should  not  take  part  in  the  battle.  The  Peruvian  army  was 
moreover  depressed  and  demoralized  by  volleys  fired  on  it 
from  the  rear  by  Bolivian  troops  which  took  part  in  the  bat- 


30 


tie  and  by  the  abandonment  of  the  field  by  those  same  Bolivian 
troops  which  did  not  stop  until  they  reached  Bolivia. 

No  one  denies  these  facts,  they  have  not  been  satisfactorily 
explained,  and  it  is  natural  that,  in  the  absence  of  such  ex- 
planation, they  be  connected  with  the  repeated  negotiations 
of  Chilean  agents  with  Bolivian  chiefs  to  separate  Bolivia 
from  the  alliance  in  consideration  of  helping  it  to  conquer 
Tacna  and  Arica.  The  "War  of  the  Pacific"  by  the  Chilean 
historian  Bulnes,  Vol.  I,  Pp.  226,  329,  598,  627,  629,  638 
and  720,  may  be  consulted  in  this  regard. 

After  the  battle  of  San  Francisco  or  of  Dolores  to  which 
we  have  already  referred,  Tarapaca  remained  under  the  con- 
trol of  Chile  in  spite  of  the  Peruvian  victory  in  the  battle  of 
that  name  (Tarapaca)  obtained  by  part  of  the  reorganized 
remains  of  the  Peruvian  army  which  had  to  go  immediately 
to  join  the  Peruvian  forces  which  later  took  part  in  the  battle 
of  Tacna. 

Once  the  Chilean  army  was  in  possession  of  Tarapaca,  no 
one  in  Chile  any  longer  concealed  which  had  been  the  object 
of  the  war  nor  the  unspeakable  joy  that  having  reached  the 
goal  caused  to  all  Chileans. 

The  Chilean  army  already  counting  on  the  triumph  at  the 
time  of  leaving  Antofagasta,  the  army's  Chief  of  Staff  thus 
proclaimed  it: 

"You  will  return  with  the  consciousness  of  having 
opened  a  new  era  of  the  national  history  placing  the 
peace,  the  industry  and  the  prosperity  of  the  Father- 
land on  broad  and  insuperable  basis."  Bulnes  "Guer- 
ra  del  Pacifico"  Vol.  I,  P.  521. 

After  the  battle  of  Dolores,  the  historian  Bulnes  writes  in 
Vol.  I,  P.  640  of  the  "Guerra  del  Pacifico": 

"The  campaign  of  Tarapaca  was  virtually  termi- 
nated because  although  it  is  true  that  a  heroic  and  un- 
fortunate event  (the  battle  of  Tarapaca)  clouded  its 

31 


brilliant  aspect,  in  fact  the  occupant,  the  traditional 
lord  of  that  territory,  abandoned  it  forever,  and  a  new 
owner  will  cover  it  henceforth  with  its  sword  and 
with  its  law." 

The  same  Bulnes  in  Vol.  I  of  the  aforesaid  work  at  page 
34,  referring  to  the  grudges  between  the  chiefs  and  the  gov- 
ernment when  the  campaign  on  Arica  was  being  effected, 
writes : 

"The  campaign  moved  in  this  atmosphere." 
"With  this  human  mud  was  made  the  gold  dust  of 
the  war  of  the  Pacific." 

And  in  the  conferences  of  the  same  port  of  Arica  on  board 
the  Lackawanna,  the  Chilean  plenipotentiaries  dared  to  pre- 
sent, without  circumlocutions  of  any  sort  and  with  the  char- 
acter of  ultimatum,  the  cession  of  Tarapaca  as  principal  con- 
dition of  the  peace. 

Tarapaca  was  therefore  unquestionably  the  object  of  the 
war  declared  by  Chile  on  Peru  under  the  futile  pretext  of  a 
secret  treaty  of  alliance  with  Bolivia  which  treaty  Chile  knew 
immediately  after  its  execution  and  possibly  even  before  then ; 
a  treaty  which  had  for  its  object  precisely  to  protect  the  allies 
against  the  conquest  of  its  saltpetre  lands  which  they  saw  in 
the  distance  and  which  was  now  an  indubitable  fact. 

In  any  case,  either  the  motive  of  the  war  was  other  than 
the  appropriation  of  Tarapaca  or  it  was  its  appropriation.  If 
the  former,  the  cession  of  Tarapaca  contained  in  the  treaty 
of  peace  is  not  explainable  nor  can  be  the  termination  of  the 
war  and  is  consequently  a  cession  without  cause  and  considera- 
tion and  as  a  result  does  not  bind  Peru.  If  the  latter,  the  war 
had  an  object  which  in  the  Chilean  opinion  is  not  only  unjust 
but  inconfessable  and  doubtless  subject  to  the  opposition  of 
the  whole  world  and  especially  of  America. 

In  any  case,  the  final  result  is  that  the  cession  of  Tarapaca 
included  in  the  treaty  of  peace  of  1883  does  not  bind  Peru 
and  is  perfectly  null. 

32 


"War  is  just  when  international  law  authorizes  re- 
course to  arms;  unjust  when  it  is  contrary  to  the  prin- 
ciples of  that  law. 

"This  principle  is  not  only  a  rule  of  morals  but  a 
true  principle  of  law.  It  has  not  it  is  true  great  prac- 
tical value  at  present  because  each  one  of  the  parties 
affrms  the  justice  of  its  cause  and  there  is  no  judge  to 
decide  as  to  the  value  of  their  assertions.  Neverthe- 
less that  distinction  between  the  law  and  morals  has 
already  some  effects  today,  especially  concerning  the 
obligations  of  allies  and  the  intervention  of  neutral 
powers;  the  allies  owe  their  cooperation  when  the 
war  is  just;  third  parties  are  entitled  to  intervene 
when  the  war  is  iniquitous."  Bluntschli  "Droit  In- 
ternational Codifie"  P.  301. 

In  the  present  case,  strange  to  say,  the  difficulty  which 
Bluntschli  points  out  in  connection  with  the  application  of 
the  principle  that  the  unjust  war  ought  not  to  produce  effect 
and  may  be  the  motive  of  intervention,  does  not  exist  be- 
cause according  to  Chilean  criterion  itself  the  cause  of  the 
war  of  1879  was  not  only  unjust  but  inconfessable. 

V.  The  treaty  of  peace  does  not  therefore  bind  Peru  and 
we  hope  that  it  will  not  either  implicitly  or  explicitly  on  any 
account  renounce  the  expectations  which  the  foregoing  con- 
siderations hold  open  for  it. 

Suffice  it  to  say  at  present  that  the  object  of  the  war  having 
been  the  conquest,  unknown  in  the  South  American  law, 
absolutely  unfounded  and  unconfessed  by  Chile,  the  latter 
has  none  of  the  rights  which  victory  gives  in  war  the  injus- 
tice of  which  is  not  obviously  demonstrated  as  in  the  present 
case  and,  on  the  contrary,  is  liable  for  all  the  damages  which 
it  caused  Peru  with  it. 

The  possession  of  Tarapaca  constituted  the  second  great 
stage  of  the  War,  and  this  time  as  the  first,  when  Peru  lost 
the  Huascar  which  was  its  only  war  weapon  worthy  of  being 
taken  into  consideration,  it  was  natural  to  expect  that  the 

33 


Chilean  invasion  would  cease.     But  the  violation  of  justice 
has  its  unbreakable  logic. 

Chile  did  not  feel  secure  in  Tarapaca.  It  had  the  con- 
sciousness of  its  injustice  and  this  inspired  it  with  two  pur- 
poses instead  of  one  which  it  had  had  before :  that  of  pressing 
Peru  in  order  that  the  latter  might  give  it  a  title,  which 
Chile  was  absolutely  lacking,  with  which  to  legitimize  in 
some  way  the  possession  of  Tarapaca,  and  that  of  reducing 
Peru  to  the  most  complete  impotency  possible  in  order  that  it 
should  not  later  rise  against  Chile,  aroused  by  the  frightful 
injustice  of  which  the  latter  had  made  it  a  victim.  To  effect 
these  purposes  it  conceived  the  most  cruel  of  wars  of 
destruction  that  has  been  witnessed  in  modern  times  be- 
tween two  Christian  countries  they  being,  besides,  of  the 
same  race,  having  a  common  history,  speaking  the  same 
language  and  belonging  to  a  continental  community  founded 
mainly  on  identical  principles  of  fraternity,  independence,  lib- 
erty and  honor  which  the  rules  of  their  private  and  public 
laws  have  inspired:  the  uti  possidetis  of  1810  and  arbitration 
were  always  the  two  axes  of  the  relations  between  the  mem- 
bers of  this  community,  the  former  insuring  the  territorial 
integrity  of  each  one  of  them  within  the  boundary  with  which 
they  were  born  to  the  independent  life  and  the  second  pre- 
serving harmony  through  even  the  gravest  disputes. 

Chile  mortally  wounded  all  this  beautiful  building  to  nour- 
ish its  excessive  ambition  for  wealth  and  did  not  hesitate  in 
sailing  along  the  extensive  Peruvian  coast  with  its  ships  bom- 
barding its  defenseless  forts,  burning  all  the  communities, 
plantations  and  factories  of  its  numerous  valleys  and  carrying 
the  war  up  to  the  capital  which  escaped  burning  and  destruc- 
tion only  through  the  energetic  intervention  of  the  neutral 
navies  anchored  at  Callao  which  could  not,  nevertheless,  pre- 
vent the  destruction  of  all  the  communities  which  the  Chilean 
army  went  through  prior  to  arriving  there.     The  detailed 

34 


narration  of  the  incredible  events  which  we  have  just  out- 
lined is  found  not  only  in  the  works  written  by  the  Peruvians 
but  in  the  more  numerous  works  written  by  Chileans  in  which 
phrases  of  just  reproach  are  not  scarce.  We  shall  cite  here 
Barros  Arana,  Bulnes,  Vicuna,  Mackena,  Chileans;  Sir  Cle- 
ments R.  Markham,  C.  B.  F.  R.  S.,  British,  and  Paz  Soldan 
and  Maurtua,  Peruvians,  and  we  shall  prescind  of  the  rest 
because  works  on  this  subject  are  so  numerous.  The  facts 
involved  have  had  so  much  resonance  in  the  world  that  we 
deem  it  surplusage  to  insist  on  the  matter  and  we  proceed  to 
deal  with  how  indispensable  for  Peru  is  the  treasure  which 
at  the  end  of  three  years  of  occupation  of  its  capital  it  had 
to  cede  to  Chile  by  the  treaty  of  peace. 

VI.  As  a  result  of  the  height  of  the  Andes  which  back  up 
the  coast  of  Peru  and  of  the  currents  of  the  ocean  which 
bathes  it,  it  never  rains  on  that  coast  which  is  for  this  reason 
an  immense  sandy  desert  cut  at  more  or  less  fifty  points  only 
by  torrential  rivers  which  descend  from  the  snow  covered 
peaks  towards  the  sea  and  irrigate  the  lands  through  which 
they  run  forming  precious  oases  the  production  of  which  is, 
however,  far  from  weighing  in  the  balance  as  does  in  space 
the  expanse  which  surrounds  them.  But  all  has  its  compen- 
sation in  nature,  and  if  it  has  denied  to  the  Peruvian  coast 
the  immense  benefit  of  the  waters  from  the  sky  it  has  given 
it  the  accummulation  of  substances  such  as  the  guano  and  the 
saltpetre  the  formation  of  which  the  rain  prevents  on  the 
lands  which  it  waters  and  which  would  serve  Peru  to  extract, 
by  selling  them  as  fertilizer  for  agriculture  and  other  uses  on 
lands  better  endowed,  the  articles  which  it  cannot  produce, 
and  to  obtain  from  them  also  the  means  of  extending  its 
scarce  agriculture  by  artificial  irrigation. 

Chile  has  broken  this  equilibrium  established  by  nature  and 
has  left  the  coast  of  Peru  deprived  of  both  rain  and  the  prod- 
ucts which  are  formed  in  its  absence  and  which  serve  as  a 

35 


substitute  for  it,  whereas  the  Chilean  coast  where  the  clouds 
are  less  miserly  is  an  inexhaustible  source  of  wealth  and  of 
beauty  on  which  the  Chilean  people  always  find  productive 
and  delightful  work.  The  products  of  the  immense  desert 
which  is  outside  its  boundaries  were  not  needed  by  it  and  in 
its  hands  they  serve  only  for  the  luxury  of  the  leading  classes, 
for  armament  disproportionate  to  its  population  and  its  nat- 
ural production  and  for  an  ostentatious  diplomacy  and  a  pro- 
paganda in  favor  of  its  interests  and  of  its  ideals  which  all 
the  world  is  appreciating  at  what  it  is  worth,  not  by  what  it 
costs,  which  is  a  great  deal,  but  for  what  it  teaches,  which 
is  nothing  or  something  less.  Chile  has  then  also  broken  its 
own  equilibrium  and  has  compromised  by  this  deed  its  future 
which  it  thought  to  insure  and  which  was  then  notably  clearer. 

Chile  does  not  wish  to  acknowledge  as  the  allies  of  Europe 
in  the  last  war  have  acknowledged  that  one  cannot  ruin  the 
neighbor  without  causing  one's  own  ruin  and  that  the  salt- 
petres and  the  guanos  of  the  desert  of  which  it  has  despoiled 
its  owners,  to  the  great  detriment  of  their  progress  and  pro- 
duction, will  sooner  or  later  cause  its  own  ruin  through  moral 
and  economic  considerations  which  have  become  indisputable. 

America,  not  blinded  by  interest  as  the  men  who  direct 
Chilean  policy,  fortunately  knows  what  to  believe  and  in  one 
way  or  another  it  will  reestablish  the  wise  order  of  nature 
destroyed  by  the  most  unjust  and  most  cruel  of  the  wars. 

VII.  Meanwhile  Chile  continues  to  ascend  along  the  path 
which  leads  it  away  from  justice  and  from  reparation  to  the 
allies  of  1879  but  which  certainly  does  not  lead  it  to  a  higher 
place  in  the  opinion  of  America  nor  to  a  greater  prosperity 
in  the  commercial  dealings  with  its  people  nor  to  a  higher 
level  in  its  interior  progress  and  sociability. 

Chile  continues  effectively  disturbing  the  tranquility  of  the 
vanquished  of  1879  and  breaking  with  unheard  of  lack  of 
practical  sense  the  treaty  of  peace  which  gave  it,  using  Bulnes' 

36 


expression,  the  gold  dust  of  Tarapaca  pursued  indefatigably 
during  forty  years. 

Peace  had  just  been  signed  and  Chile  continued  the  con- 
quest to  which  it  put  an  end  extending  itself  through  terri- 
tories and  communities  on  the  province  of  Tarata  and  even 
of  the  Department  of  Puno  and  refusing  to  return  them 
under  pretexts  no  more  sound  than  those  which  it  alleged  to 
declare  the  war.  The  question  of  Tarata  is  also  already  forty 
years  old  during  which  years  Chile  has  been  restraining  its 
determination  and  aggravating  the  deed  in  exactly  the  same 
way  that  during  the  previous  forty  years  it  had  resisted  the 
just  claims  of  Bolivia  at  the  same  time  that  it  already  ad- 
vanced into  its  desert  with  the  aim  of  awaiting  a  propitious 
occasion  to  finally  obtain  a  title  of  ownership  and  to  begin 
anew  on  the  basis  of  what  it  should  offer  it.  There  cannot 
be  peace  with  Chile  because  war  is  its  industry. 

More  serious  still  is  the  violation  which  Chile  has  made  and 
continues  to  make  of  the  third  clause  of  the  treaty  of  peace 
which  says: 

"The  territory  of  the  provinces  of  Tacna  and 
Arica  which  bounds  ....  shall  continue  to  be  pos- 
sessed by  Chile  and  subject  to  the  Chilean  laws  and 
authorities  during  the  period  of  ten  years  counted 
from  the  date  of  ratification  of  this  treaty  of  peace. 
At  the  end  of  this  period  a  plebiscite  will  decide,  by 
popular  vote,  whether  the  territory  of  the  said  prov- 
inces remains  definitively  under  the  ownership  and  sov- 
ereignty of  Chile  or  continues  to  be  part  of  the  Peru- 
vian territory.  That  one  of  the  two  countries  to 
which  the  provinces  of  Tacna  and  Arica  remain  an- 
nexed shall  pay  to  the  other  ten  million  pesos  Chilean 
silver  currency  or  Peruvian  soles  of  equal  alloy  and 
weight." 

"A  special  protocol  which  will  be  considered  an 
integral  part  of  this  treaty  will  establish  the  form 
in  which  the  plebiscite  shall  take  place  and  the  terms 

37 


on  and  the  periods  within  which  the  ten  millions  shall 
be  paid  by  the  country  which  remain  the  owner  of  the 
provinces  of  Tacna  and  Arica." 

Chile  avoided  with  different  pretexts  the  verbal  insinua- 
tions of  the  Peruvian  functionaries  to  execute  the  protocol 
contemplated  in  the  last  part  of  the  transcribed  clause  until 
April  of  the  year  1892,  when  the  Peruvian  Foreign  Office 
formally  initiated  the  negotiations  for  the  execution  of  the 
complementary  protocol  provided  for  in  the  treaty  of  Ancon 
and  from  said  date  until  now  it  has  not  been  possible  to  reach 
any  definitive  results.  The  course  which  these  negotiations 
already  more  than  thirty  years  old  have  followed,  which  it 
would  be  impossible  to  state  here  in  all  its  details,  has  been 
thus  summarized  by  Dr.  Victor  M.  Maurtua  in  his  recent 
work  "Sobre  el  Pacifico  del  Sur"  at  page  159. 

"The  weight  of  the  whole  treaty  of  Ancon  has 
fallen  on  Peru.  A  disastrous  diplomatic  instrument 
without  any  doubt!  And  nevertheless  Peru  has  per- 
formed it  loyally.  One  only  clause  left  some  hope: 
the  recovery  of  the  heroic  provinces  of  live  and  intense 
loyalty.  Peru  has  not  been  able  to  obtain  the  holding 
of  the  plebiscite  on  which  their  restitution  depended." 

"In  1892,  1893  and  1896  it  made  efforts  to  recover 
its  provinces  by  means  of  direct  settlement  or  by 
plebiscite.  In  vain.  On  the  termination  of  the  pe- 
riod of  ten  years  provided  by  the  treaty  for  the  Chilean 
occupation  Peru  demanded  that  its  provinces  should  be 
returned  to  its  administration.  This  was  refused  it. 
In  1892,  1894  (twice),  1896,  1898,  1900,  1905,  1907, 
Peru  insistently  claimed  the  plebiscite.  Chile  refused 
to  effect  it  pretending  to  proceed  itself  and  without 
any  guaranty  of  sincerity  to  consult  the  popular  will 
giving  the  right  to  vote  to  the  persons  which  it  should 
designate  and  under  the  conditions  which  it  should 
deem  proper  to  confirm  its  conquest.  Peru  proposes 
to  entrust  the  zone  of  the  plebiscite  to  an  interna- 
tional commission.     New  Chilean  refusal.     Peru  of- 

38 


fered  to  resort  to  arbitration  to  settle  the  difference 
and  to  determine  the  proceedings  of  a  popular  consul- 
tation. Chile  refused  arbitration.  Peru  entered  into 
two  agreements  with  the  Chilean  government:  one 
in  1894,  the  other  in  1898,  the  latter  was  fully  per- 
fected for  the  holding  of  the  plebiscite.  Chile  with- 
drew from  the  first  of  said  agreements  and  its  Par- 
liament rejected  the  second  because  it  contained  an 
arbitration  clause  regarding  certain  formalities  of  the 
plebiscite.  Chile  to  check  the  Peruvian  effort  under- 
takes the  denationalization  of  the  provinces  and  their 
assimilation  in  a  tyrannical  way.  Peru  fought  this 
policy,  interposed  claims  against  it  one  hundred  times, 
denounced  it  as  a  fraud  against  the  treaty.  Chile  dis- 
regards these  claims  and  continues  its  work  expelling 
the  Peruvian  element,  appropriating  the  real  estate, 
arbitrarily  importing  immigrants  for  the  purpose  of 
Chilean  colonization.  Finally,  when  after  twenty 
years  its  occupation  title  had  lapsed  and  it  could  be- 
lieve its  work  of  denationalization  ended,  it  invited 
Peru  in  1909  and  1910  to  a  plebiscite.  Chile  even 
then  did  not  propose  to  organize  a  true  popular  con- 
sultation :  It  declared  that  the  third  article  of  the 
treaty  of  Ancon  constituted  a  disguised  annexation, 
the  plebiscite  would  be  held  under  the  control  of  its 
authorities  and  for  the  purpose  of  legalizing  the  an- 
nexation. Such  is,  in  a  few  words,  the  synthesis  of 
the  affair." 

So  Chile  has  violated  the  third  clause  of  the  treaty  of 
Ancon.  There  is  not  the  least  doubt  of  this.  The  develop- 
ment of  the  negotiations  recorded  in  detail  in  the  reports  of 
the  Foreign  Offices  of  the  two  countries,  the  narratives  of 
their  newspaper  men  and  historians,  everything,  everything, 
tends  to  confirm  the  most  absolute  and  complete  evidence  on 
this  matter.  We  shall  not  therefore  insist  on  it  and  we  shall 
finish  by  copying  from  the  book  "Documentos  Esenciales  del 
Debate  Peruano-Chileno,"  already  mentioned,  Vol.  II,  P. 
163  the  following  conclusive  documents: 

39 


"D.  67.— BULNES  THE  OFFICIAL  CHIL- 
EAN HISTORIAN  STATES  THAT  PERU 
HAS  ALWAYS  WISHED  TO  FULFILL  THE 
TREATY  OF  ANCON  AND  THAT  THE  POL- 
ICY OF  CHILE  HAS  BEEN  ONE  OF  VACIL- 
LATIONS AND  OF  CURVES." 

"Peru  has  had  live  interest  in  that  the  plebiscite 
be  held.  To  deny  it  is  to  place  oneself  in  a  bad  situa- 
tion because  it  can  prove  the  contrary  by  merely  ex- 
hibiting the  diplomatic  documents.  The  reasons  of 
that  interest  are  very  clear  and  may  be  condensed  as 
follows : 

"1. — Chile  was  in  possession  of  the  disputed  thing 
and  the  only  means  that  Peru  had  of  recovering  it 
was  to  press  it  to  comply  with  the  condition  provided 
in  the  treaty.  Consequently  the  natural  part  of  Peru 
during  the  gestation  of  this  affair  was  "active,"  that 
of  Chile  "passive." 

"2. — Peru  has  been  listening  to  the  clamor  of  the 
inhabitants  to  incorporate  themselves  in  their  an- 
cient nationality  and  by  patriotism  and  even  by  de- 
corum it  could  not  show  itself  unfeeling  to  that  pres- 


sure." 


"3. — Peru  has  had  blind  confidence  in  the  plebis- 
cite. The  Peruvian  policy  has  been  firm  from  the  be- 
ginning of  the  debate  and  ours  has  had  all  sorts  of 
vacillations  and  curves.  The  Peruvian  objective 
could  not  vacillate  because  its  ancient  desire  has  been 
to  recover  its  ancient  provinces  causing  the  plebiscite 
to  be  held  Under  the  control  of  a  foreign  authority 
and  trying  to  obtain  the  greatest  facilities  for  the  pay- 
ment of  the  ransom." 

"On  the  other  hand  Chile  has  worked  one  day  to 
win  the  plebiscite  for  its  own  benefit,  another  to  make 
a  gift  of  the  territory  to  Bolivia,  another  to  deliver 
it  to  Peru  and  naturally  its  action  has  been  weak  and 
it  has  made  declarations  and  stated  contradictory  and 
dangerous  principles." 

"Gonzalo  Bulnes." 


40 


"D.  68.— THE  CHILEAN  SENATOR  ROSS 
DECLARES  THAT  CHILE  HAS  HINDERED 
THE  REALIZATION  OF  THE  PLEBISCITE 
AND  THAT  IN  THE  OPINION  OF  THE 
BRITISH  DELEGATE  MR.  BUNSEN  ITS 
SITUATION  IN  THIS  REGARD  IS  FALSE 
AND  UNSUSTAINABLE. 

"The  period  of  ten  years  for  the  holding  of  the 
stipulated  plebiscite  ended  in  1893,  twenty-eight  years 
ago,  and  that  act  has  not  been  performed." 

"Why?  We  can  in  conscience  affirm  that  it  has 
not  been  performed  because  Chile  has  hindered  its  per- 
formance by  opposing  all  kinds  of  difficulties  and  of 
dilatory  measures." 

"In  Chile,  Peru  has  been  blamed  for  the  delay  in 
the  arrangements  for  the  plebiscite  but  it  does  not 
seem  that  this  argument  could  be  proved.  On  the 
contrary,  in  Peru  Chile  is  blamed." 

"The  situation  is  very  clear ;  the  "entente"  triumph- 
ing in  the  war  which  is  very  probable,  and  interna- 
tional tribunal  will  be  organized  the  jurisdiction  of 
which  will  embrace  all  the  countries  of  America.  It 
is  proclaimed  by  President  Wilson  in  the  name  of  all 
the  belligerent  nations;  it  is  supported  by  Great 
Britain ;  it  is  accepted  by  Peru  which  proposes  to  claim 
its  rights  before  it.  Peru  will  certainly  be  one  of  the 
members  of  the  League  of  Nations  and  shall  cause  it- 
self to  be  heard." 

"If  the  actual  situation  continues  Chile  will  see 
itself  compelled  to  accept  the  arbitration  of  the  tri- 
bunal of  the  League  of  Nations  as  to  the  realization 
and  form  of  the  plebiscite.  That  the  verdict  of  the 
tribunal  will  be  contrary  to  Chile  there  is  no  doubt." 

"Mr.  Bunsen  as  an  experienced  diplomat  took  good 
care  as  much  in  Chile  as  in  Bolivia  and  in  Peru  not 
to  manifest  his  opinion  on  the  Tacna  and  Arica  ques- 
tion. But  we  may  now  affirm  with  full  knowledge 
of  the  case  that  Mr.  Bunsen  has  studied  with  his 
secretary  all  the  antecedents  of  the  Tacna  and  Arica 

41 


question  between  Peru  and  Chile  and  has  formed  the 
firm  personal  opinion  that  Chile  has  failed  to  fulfill 
its  obligations  established  in  the  treaty  of  Ancon  and 
that  it  finds  itself  in  that  regard  in  a  false  and  unsus- 
tainable situation." 

"This  is  an  important  and  not  very  favorable  ante- 
cedent for  Chile  in  this  delicate  question.  The  plebis- 
cite will  be  held  and  the  result  will  be  at  least  very 
doubtful  for  Chile.  We  would  have  to  submit  to  the 
impositions  of  the  tribunal  bearing  the  consequent 
shame  and  probably  would  have  to  submit  also  to 
have  the  territories  of  Tacna  and  Arica  returned  to 
the  jurisdiction  and  sovereignty  of  Peru  and  remain 
partitioned  from  Tarapaca." 

"Augustin  Ross," 
"Revista  Chilena." 

As  international  authority  we  transcribe  the  follow- 
ing: 

"To  break  a  treaty  of  peace  is  to  violate  the  agree- 
ments entered  into  in  it  either  by  doing  what  it  forbids 
or  by  not  doing  what  it  prescribes.  One  may  fail  to 
perform  the  obligations  arising  from  a  treaty  in  three 
different  manners:  by  conduct  contrary  to  the  nature 
and  to  the  essence  of  the  treaty  of  peace  in  general  or 
by  acts  incompatible  with  the  particular  nature  of  the 
treaty  or  finally  by  violating  some  one  of  its  express 
articles." 

"One  acts  against  the  nature  and  the  essense  of 
every  treaty  of  peace,  against  peace  itself,  when  one 
disturbs  it  without  cause,  either  by  taking  up  arms  and 
renewing  the  war  although  one  cannot  allege  even  a 
scarcely  plausible  pretext  or  by  offending  the  mental 
comfort  of  the  one  with  whom  the  peace  has  been 
made  and  by  treating  it  or  its  subjects  in  a  manner 
incompatible  with  the  status  of  a  nation  and  which  it 
cannot  suffer  without  failing  in  its  self  respect  .  .   .   ." 

"The  second  way  of  breaking  a  treaty  of  peace  is  by 
doing  something  contrary  to  that  which  the  particular 
nature  of  the  treaty  requires.     Thus  every  act  con- 

42 


trary  to  friendship  breaks  a  treaty  of  peace  made  under 
the  express  condition  of  living  forever  as  good  friends. 
To  favor  the  enemies  of  a  nation,  to  treat  its  subjects 
harshly,  to  molest  its  commerce  without  cause,  to  pre- 
fer another  nation  to  it,  to  refuse  it  necessary  supplies 
for  which  it  wishes  to  pay  and  which  could  be  spared, 
to  protect  its  conspirators  or  rebels,  to  give  them 
asylum:  all  those  are  acts  equally  contrary  to  friend- 
ship .  .  .  ." 

"Finally  peace  is  broken  by  the  violation  of  some  one 
of  the  express  articles  of  the  treaty.  This  third 
manner  of  breaking  is  the  most  decided,  the  least  sub- 
ject to  evasions  and  chicanery.  Whichever  fails  to 
perform  its  obligations  annuls  the  treaty  as  much  as  it 
is  in  its  power  to  do  so;  there  is  no  doubt  of  that." 

"Pretended  delays  are  the  equivalent  of  an  express 
refusal  and  they  do  not  differ  from  it  except  by  the 
artifice  with  which  the  one  which  makes  use  of  them 
would  wish  to  cover  its  bad  faith.  It  adds  fraud  to 
perfidy  and  really  violates  the  article  which  it  ought 
to  comply  with." 

"When  the  treaty  of  peace  is  violated  by  one  of  the 
contracting  parties  the  other  may  declare  the  treaty 
broken  or  let  it  subsist;  because  it  cannot  be  bound  by 
a  treaty  which  contains  reciprocal  agreements  towards 
one  which  does  not  respect  that  very  treaty  .  .  .  ." 
Vattel  Droit  Des  Gens  Pp.  747,  751,  752  and  756. 

"To  recommence  a  war,  by  breach  of  the  articles 
of  a  treaty  of  peace,  is  deemed  much  more  odious  than 
to  provoke  a  war  by  some  new  demand  and  aggression ; 
for  the  latter  is  simply  injustice  but,  in  the  former 
case,  the  party  is  guilty  both  of  perfidy  and  injustice. 
The  violation  of  any  one  article  of  a  treaty  is  a  vio- 
lation of  the  whole  treaty ;  for  all  the  articles  are  de- 
pendent on  each  other,  and  one  is  to  be  deemed  a  con- 
dition of  the  other;  and  a  violation  of  any  single 
article  overthrows  the  whole  treaty,  if  the  injured 
party  elects  so  to  consider  it.  This  may,  however, 
be  prevented  by  an  express  provision,  that  if  one  article 
be  broken,  the  others  shall,  nevertheless,  continue  in 
full  force.     There  is  a  strong  instance  in  the  history 

43 


of  the  United  States  of  the  annihilation  of  treaties  by 
the  act  of  the  injured  party.  In  1798,  the  Congress 
of  that  country  declared  that  the  treaties  with  France 
were  no  longer  obligatory  on  the  United  States,  as 
they  had  been  repeatedly  violated  on  the  part  of  the 
French  Government,  and  all  just  claims  for  repara- 
tion refused."     Kent  "International  Law"  P.  420. 

The  act  of  Congress  "annulling"  the  treaties  fol- 
lows: 

"Whereas  the  treaties  concluded  between  the 
United  States  and  France  have  been  repeatedly  vio- 
lated on  the  part  of  the  French  Government,  and  the 
just  claims  of  the  United  States  for  reparation  of  the 
injuries  so  committed  have  been  refused,  and  their 
attempts  to  negotiate  an  amicable  adjustment  of  all 
complaints  between  the  two  nations  have  been  repelled 
with  great  indignity;  and  whereas,  under  authority 
of  the  French  Government,  there  is  yet  pursued 
against  the  United  States  a  system  of  predatory  vio- 
lence, infracting  the  said  treaties  and  hostile  to  the 
rights  of  a  free  and  independent  nation: 

"Be  it  enacted  by  the  Senate  and  House  of  Repre- 
sentatives of  the  United  States  of  America  in  Con- 
gress assembled,  That  the  United  States  are  of  right 
freed  and  exonerated  from  the  stipulations  of  the 
treaty  and  of  the  consular  convention  heretofore  con- 
cluded between  the  United  States  and  France,  and 
that  the  same  shall  not  henceforth  be  regarded  as 
legally  obligatory  on  the  Government  or  citizens  of 
the  United  States. 

"Approved  July  7,  1798."     1  U.  S.  Stat.  1-578. 

"The  violation  of  any  one  article  of  the  treaty  is  a 
violation  of  the  whole  treaty;  for  all  the  articles  are 
dependent  on  each  other  and  one  is  to  be  deemed  a  con- 
dition of  the  other.  A  violation  of  any  single  article 
abrogates  the  whole  treaty,  if  the  injured  party  so 
elects  to  consider  it.  This  may,  however,  be  pre- 
vented by  an  express  stipulation,  that  if  one  article  be 
broken,  the  others  shall  nevertheless  continue  in  full 

44 


force.  If  the  treaty  is  violated  by  one  of  the  con- 
tracting parties,  either  by  proceedings  incompatible 
with  its  general  spirit,  or  by  a  specific  breach  of  any 
one  of  its  articles,  it  becomes  not  absolutely  void,  but 
voidable  at  the  election  of  the  injured  party.  If  he 
prefers  not  to  come  to  a  rupture,  the  treaty  remains 
valid  and  obligatory.  He  may  waive  or  remit  the  in- 
fraction committed,  or  he  may  demand  a  just  satisfac- 
tion."    Wheaton  "International  Law"  P.  621. 

There  is  not  then  any  difference  of  opinion  among  the  in- 
ternational law  authorities  on  the  point  that  the  violation  of 
a  clause  by  one  of  the  contracting  parties  entitles  the  other 
to-consider  the  treaty  null  or  lapsed. 

A  slight  discrepancy  exists  regarding  the  kind  of  the  obliga- 
tion violated  or  not  fulfilled  and  some  authors  insist  that  it 
must  be  essential,  in  the  light  of  the  nature  of  the  treaty,  or 
of  unquestionable  importance.  But  nothing  more  essential 
can  be  conceived  in  the  treaty  of  Ancon  than  the  obligation 
contracted  by  Chile  in  the  third  clause  because  the  third  clause 
was  the  only  point  of  discord  in  the  final  conferences  which 
preceded  the  execution  of  the  peace  and  only  the  irrevocable 
resolution  of  the  Peruvian  negotiators  which  did  not  yield 
the  rights  which  said  clause  gives  Peru  resulted  in  its  accept- 
ance by  the  Chileans. 

Nothing  can  be  considered  more  essential  in  a  treaty  than 
that  stipulation  without  which  it  would  have  been  impossible 
to  make  the  treaty,  because  its  insertion  signifies  that  in  the 
final  accord  of  the  parties  both  agreed  that  the  existence  of 
the  treaty  was  dependent  upon  that  stipulation.  And  that 
Peru  exacted  the  third  clause  as  an  irrevocable  condition  is 
proved  by  the  record  of  the  negotiations  which  preceded  the 
signing  of  the  treaty. 

As  it  would  not  be  possible  to  transcribe  here  all  the  docu- 
ments in  point  we  shall  limit  ourselves  to  the  following  two 
which  we  take  from  the  Biblioteca  del  Mercurio  Peruano's 

45 


"Documentos  Esenciales  del  Debate  Peruano  Chileno"  pub- 
lished by  the  Comite  Patriotico  Peruano,  Series  A.  Vol.  2, 

P.  83: 

"THE  TREATY  OF  ANCON  AND  THE 
NATURE  OF  THE  PLEBISCITE  PROVIDED 
FOR  IN  IT." 

<<D.  40— BASIS  PROPOSED  TO  GENERAL 
IGLESIAS  AND  REJECTED  BY  THE  LAT- 
TER." 

"In  January  of  the  year  1883  the  plenipotentiary 
Mr.  Novoa  presented  to  Mr.  Castro  Saldivar  a  mem- 
orandum of  note  containing  the  following  bases: 

"No.  1. — The  absolute  and  unconditional  cession  of 
Tarapaca. 

"No.  2. — The  sale  of  Tacna  and  Arica  for  ten  mil- 
lion pesos  payable  three  at  the  time  of  ratification  of 
the  treaty  and  the  remaining  seven  in  two,  four  and 
six  years ; 

"No.  3. — The  territories  ceded  and  bought  do  not 
acknowledge  Peruvian  debt." 

"As  regards  the  guano  and  the  saltpetre,  the  con- 
tract entered  into  and  the  decrees  of  the  supreme  gov- 
ernment of  Chile  on  the  matter  shall  be  faithfully 
fulfilled." 

"No.  4. — As  to  the  islands  of  Lobos,  Chile  will  con- 
tinue to  administer  them  until  the  termination  of  the 
contract  of  sale  of  the  million  tons  and  when  the 
treaty  be  ratified  and  exchanged  Chile  will  deliver  to 
Peru  the  fifty  per  cent  net  which  it  now  reserves  for 
itself;" 

"No.  5. — Subsequent  agreements  will  provide  for 
the  commercial  relations  and  the  indemnities  due  to  the 
Chileans." 

"D.  41.— DECLARATION  OF  THE  CHIL- 
EAN NEGOTIATOR  NOVOA  ON  THE  RE- 
FUSAL OF  PERU  TO  SELL  TACNA  AND 
ARICA  AND  ON  THE  VERIDICAL  AND 
FREE  NATURE  OF  THE  PLEBISCITE 
WHICH  WAS  PROPOSED." 

46 


"Mr.  Novoa  says  in  his  letter  to  Mr.  Castro  Saldi- 
var: 

"It  having  been  declared  by  me  that  it  was  not  even 
possible  to  enter  into  discussion  regarding  the  cession 
of  Tarapaca,  Mr.  Lavalle  as  well  as  you  went  on  to 
object  to  the  second  proposal  relating  to  Tacna  and 
Arica.  You  expressed  to  me  that  you  did  not  accept 
the  proposal  for  ten  millions  nor  for  any  sum  because 
not  only  were  there  Peruvian  interests  in  that  territory 
which  already  involved  an  immense  sacrifice  but  there 
was  also  Peruvian  population.  You  further  made  a 
series  of  observations  in  this  regard." 

"For  my  part,  I  manifested  to  you  that  the  situa- 
tion created  by  the  war  rendered  the  possession  of  those 
territories  necessary  for  Chile,  and  that  the  circum- 
stance that  there  existed  Peruvian  population  there 
was  not  such  a  serious  obstacle  and  was  on  the  other 
hand  what  always  happened  in  analogous  cases.  That 
in  the  primordial  interests  of  peace  that  was  not  an 
obstacle.  You  insisted  on  your  observations  and  it 
was  left  up  to  both  sides  to  think  the  matter  over 
further  and  to  try  to  arrive  at  a  conclusion  at  a  con- 
ference to  be  held  soon  thereafter." 

"On  the  9th  of  April  we  again  met  in  Chorrillos 
and  resuming  the  previous  conference  the  territories  of 
Tacna  and  Arica  were  again  the  subject  of  discussion. 
After  a  prolonged  discussion  the  idea  of  the  plebiscite 
such  as  the  treaty  of  the  20th  of  October  has  recorded 
it  was  accepted.  Agreed  upon  this  idea,  Mr.  Lavalle 
requested  that  if  the  popular  vote  declared  that  Tacna 
and  Arica  should  remain  forever  under  the  ownership 
of  Peru  the  latter  did  not  have  to  pay  ten  millions  of 
pesos  since  it  did  not  acquire  but  simply  kept  what 
was  its  own.  I  insisted  that  it  was  necessary  to  estab- 
lish reciprocity  since  whether  this  territory  should 
later  be  Chilean  or  Peruvian  depended  on  the  popular 
vote  and  not  on  the  will  of  either  of  the  contracting 
parties." 

Every   treaty  between   two  nations  is  in   general  subject 
to  the  same  rules  which  apply  to  a  bilateral  contract  between 

47 


two  private  parties:  each  one  owes  the  equivalent  of  what  it 
receives:  what  does  conqueror  give  in  a  treaty  of  peace  in  ex- 
change for  receiving  from  the  conquered  all  that  was  the  ob- 
ject of  the  dispute  or  immeasurably  more  as  in  the  present 
case?  It  gives  the  peace,  the  suppression  of  the  force  which 
oppresses  the  vanquished  and  the  restitution  of  all  the  mani- 
festations of  consideration  and  friendship  which  are  substi- 
tuted for  the  hostilities  of  the  war. 

Well  then,  Peru  has  not  had  peace  since  it  signed  the  treaty 
with  Chile.  It  has  not  received  in  any  form  or  proportion 
the  equivalent  of  the  immense  sacrifices  which  were  exacted 
from  it.  The  treaty,  therefore,  if  it  ever  bound  Peru,  has 
ceased  to  be  binding  upon  it.    . 

It  is  fully  evident  then  that  the  treaty  of  peace  of  1883 
has  lapsed  due  to  the  non-fulfillment  of  the  third  clause  and 
by  Chile's  opposition  to  it  during  thirty  years,  besides  being 
null  from  its  inception  as  we  demonstrated  before. 

We  the  natives  of  Tarapaca  consequently  have  the  most 
just  and  gratifying  outlook  of  the  devolution  of  Tarapaca 
to  the  Motherland  and  of  living  again  in  the  land  of  our 
birth  whence  we  have  been  driven  by  the  invader. 

This  anticipation  must  now  convert  itself  into  reality  as  a 
result  of  the  work  of  the  conference  which  is  about  to  be  held 
in  Washington. 

VIII.  We  cannot  expect  that  the  conference  ignore  our 
rights  which  are  also  those  of  all  Peru  because  if  such  a  thing 
should  happen,  these  other  two  would  also  happen :  the  work 
of  the  conference  would  be  truncate  and  its  results  no  less 
truncate,  and  we  not  only  would  remain  in  the  sad  and 
ruinous  condition  in  which  we  now  find  ourselves  but  we 
would  lose  the  hope  of  obtaining  in  the  future  the  restitutions 
to  which  we  are  entitled,  since  a  settlement  between  Peru  and 
Chile,  in  the  absence  of  the  force  which  exerted  pressure  on 
the  former  when  the  treaty  of  peace  was  executed,  would 

43 


signify  a  clean  title  to  all  that  which  that  treaty  granted  to 
Chile  should  it  not  be  altered  by  the  conference,  and  would 
signify  besides,  implicitly  or  explicitly,  the  guaranty  of  that 
great  republic  to  the  maintenance  of  the  iniquitous  conquest 
which  tore  us  from  the  Motherland. 

IX.  Finally,  if  a  treaty  should  be  signed  in  Washington 
without  considering  the  rights  of  Peru  to  Tarapaca  or  with- 
out conceding  them  to  it,  the  conference  would  have  been  a 
failure  because  Chile  once  the  irrevocable  owner  of  Tarapaca, 
Bolivia  would  irrevocably  also  remain  deprived  of  every  out- 
let to  the  ocean  and  of  all  hope  of  having  it  so  long  as  the 
new  treaty  should  subsist.  Chile  could  not  then  be  willing 
to  return  to  Bolivia  the  desert  which  it  wrested  from  it  nor 
any  part  of  that  desert  because  however  small  that  part 
should  be  it  would  always  cause  a  gap  in  what  would  have 
become  with  unassailable  title  Chilean  property. 

It  is  possible  that  Chile  would  then  go  back  to  the  old 
theme  of  giving  Bolivia  a  port  at  the  expense  of  Peru.  How- 
ever much  an  eighty  years'  incubation  may  have  naturalized 
in  the  Chilean  minds  this  idea  that  Peru  besides  granting  its 
own  to  Chile  ought  to  pay  for  the  latter's  trespasses  against 
Bolivia,  Bolivia  would  not  dare  to  accept  such  a  present  nor 
could  America  and  the  world  fail  to  condemn  it. 

In  any  case,  a  problem  would  have  remained  without  solu- 
tion, and  if  it  should  solve  itself  in  some  way,  as  naturally 
would  happen  because  nations  as  well  as  rivers  know  how  to 
open  for  themselves  an  outlet  to  the  sea,  there  would  be  in 
America  a  commotion,  if  not  two  or  more,  and,  meanwhile, 
intranquility  with  all  its  consequences  and  dangers.  The  in- 
dubitable common  sense  of  the  Government  of  that  great 
republic  gives  us  the  most  deeply  rooted  hope  that  that  will 
not  happen  and  that  if  the  conference  should  not  entirely 
solve  the  problem  of  the  South  Pacific,  it  would  at  least  not 
close  the  door  to  just  subsequent  solutions. 

49 


CABLE  ADDRESS  TO  PRESIDENT  WILSON  BY  THE 
NATIVES  OF  TARAPACA. 

Lima,  February  8th,  1919. 
To  President  Wilson,  1.5  P.  M. 

Paris. 

We,  natives  of  Tarapaca,  of  Tacna  and  Arica,  after 
having  supported  for  more  than  thirty-eight  years  the 
suffering  of  a  cruel  captivity,  find  ourselves  today  expelled 
violently  by  Chile  from  the  land  where  we  were  born. 

Peru  is  unable  to  protect  out  rights,  as  much  owing  to 
the  fact  that  it  is  unprepared  for  war  as  owing  to  its  ac- 
ceptance of  the  wise  counsel  of  the  United  States  of  avoid- 
ing any  solution  by  force. 

Under  these  conditions  and  before  the  indifference  of 
the  other  Governments  of  South  America,  we  gather  to 
ask  justice  from  the  eminent  man  who  in  1918  proclaimed 
so  that  the  whole  world  might  hear,  the  most  sublime 
principles  of  international  justice,  and  who,  placing  at  the 
service  of  these  principles  the  colossal  forces  of  his  country, 
triumphed  against  the  despotism  and  arbitariness  which 
ruled  in  some  States  of  Europe. 

In  order  that  your  Excellency  may  appreciate  the  justice 
of  our  cause,  we  give  here  a  brief  summary  of  the  conflict 
pending  between  our  country  and  Chile. 

Peru,  which  possessed  a  great  territory  and  such  fabulous 
riches  as  that  contained  in  the  guano  and  the  nitrate, 
coveted  nothing  from  the  other  countries  of  America; 
while  Chile,  poor  in  resources  and  with  a  closely  circum- 
scribed territory,  was  possessed  of  the  insistent  desire  of 
enriching  itself  and  extending  its  soil  at  the  cost  of  the 
neighboring  nations. 

In  1871,  Chile  contracted  for  two  powerful  armoured 
cruisers  and  a  large  quantity  of  other  warlike  elements, 

51 


which    gave    it    a    notable    military    superiority    on    the 
Pacific. 

Peru  in  order  to  meet  the  danger  which  threatened  the 
peace  in  this  part  of  the  American  Continent  accepted  in 
1873  the  purely  defensive  alliance  proposed  by  Bolivia;  an 
alliance  in  which  unfortunately  they  did  not  succeed  in 
including  the  Argentine  Republic,  which  would  certainly 
have  prevented  the  war  of  conquest  of  1879. 

In  that  year  Chile  completed  its  armament  and  believed 
that  the  moment  had  arrived  for  the  realization  of  its 
ambition.  Availing  itself  of  a  petty  protest,  Antofagasta 
was  invaded,  thus  violating  the  arbitration  agreement 
which  it  had  collaborated  with  Bolivia,  and  replied  to  the 
friendly  intervention  of  Peru  by  declaring  war. 

Better  armed  than  its  opponents  Chile  gained  the  war 
and  after  a  struggle  of  more  than  four  years  and  occupation 
of  the  capital  of  Peru  by  the  Chilian  army,  peace  was 
proposed. 

Chile  imposed  as  a  condition  the  cession  of  Tarapaca, 
where  were  located  the  guano  and  nitrates  which  it  desired, 
a  pretention  which  was  refused  by  Peru. 

General  Hurlburt,  the  American  Minister  in  Peru,  made 
known  to  the  Chile  representative  that  his  instructions 
were:  "To  work  earnestly  for  the  celebration  of  a  treaty  of 
peace  eliminating  the  cession  of  territories,  whether  as  a 
previous  question,  or  as  a  fundamental  basis  of  a  treaty," 
and  in  the  memorandum  which  he  addressed  to  the 
Chilian  chief  on  the  23rd  of  August,  1881,  he  said:  "As 
there  never  has  existed  any  question  of  limits  between 
Peru  and  Chile,  consequently  there  are  no  frontiers  to 
delimitate;  and  as  Chile  has  repeatedly  stated,  publicly  and 
officially,  that  it  has  no  intention  nor  design  of  forcibly 
annexing  territory,  we  are  of  the  clear  opinion  that  now 
such  an  attitude  would  not  harmonized  with  the  dignity 
and  with  good  faith  of  Chile,  and  would  be  disastrous  for 

52 


the  future  tranquility  of  both  countries,  and  engender  a 
grave  enmity  that  would  constantly  be  manifested  by 
disturbances.  Such  a  procedure  on  the  part  of  Chile 
would  be  regarded  with  great  disfavor  by  the  United 
States." 

Unfortunately  for  Peru  the  assassination  of  President 
Garfield  occurred  at  this  time  and  shortly  afterwards  Mr. 
Hurlburt  died  violently  and  suspiciously. 

The  new  President  of  the  United  States  did  not  follow 
out  the  foreign  policy  of  his  predecessor,  and  Peru  con- 
quered, without  elements  of  war,  and  exhausted  by  a  long 
struggle  was  obliged  to  sign  the  peace  of  Ancon,  imposed 
by  force,  and  according  to  which  Chile  appropriated  the 
department  of  Tarapaca  and  was  to  occupy  Tacna  and 
Arica  for  ten  years. 

When  this  treaty  of  peace  was  discussed  we  the  inhabi- 
tants (natives)  of  Tarapaca  presented  a  protest  whose 
conclusions  were: 

1st. — Not  to  recognize  neither  to  accept  as  valid  any 
treaty  to  be  celebrated  by  Peru  in  which  may  be  stipu- 
lated the  cession  of  our  department  to  Chile,  or  any 
other  State,  whatever  may  be  the  Peruvian  Government 
celebrating  it  and  the  source  from  which  its  authority 
emanates. 

"2. — In  the  event  of  the  condition  mentioned  in  the 
preceding  articles  being  carried  out,  to  resume  our  innate 
right  of  sovereignty  to  be  made  effective  in  such  form,  how 
and  when  convenient,  remaining  annulled  "de  facto"  the 
covenant  convention  uniting  us  to  Peru. 

"3. — Not  to  accept  the  appeal  to  the  wishes  of  the 
inhabitants  of  our  department,  unless  the  voting  is  con- 
fined exclusively  to  the  citizens  born  in  this  territory,  the 
only  ones  who  have  the  right  to  decide  as  to  its  future 
destiny,  the  voting  to  be  carried  out  with  full  guarantees. 


S3 


"4. — To  remain  loyal  to  the  Peruvian  laws,  to  follow  the 
dispositions  of  its  recognized  authority  and  to  accept  the 
common  fate  reserved  for  Peru  in  the  present  or  in  what- 
ever other  emergency  while  the  principles  of  its  territorial 
integrity  written  in  the  fundamental  charter  of  the  State, 
are  observed. 

''To  opportunely  determine  the  manner  of  making 
effective  those  resolutions  and  giving  them  due  publicity 
according  to  the  turn  of  events." 

We,  the  citizens  of  Tacna  and  Arica  presented  a  similar 
protest  but  Chile  employing  the  same  methods  used  by 
Germany  against  France  in  1871,  forced  Peru  to  sign  the 
treaty  which  it  imposed. 

This  treaty  wrung  from  us  by  force,  signed  by  function- 
aries who  were  not  the  legal  representatives  of  Peru,  and 
approved  by  a  Congress  in  which  there  were  no  representa- 
tives from  Tarapaca,  Tacna,  Arica  and  many  other  prov- 
inces of  the  Republic,  violated  the  Peruvian  constitution, 
which  prohibits  the  celebration  of  agreements  affecting  the 
territorial  integrity  or  the  sovereignty  of  the  nation. 

Chile,  which  with  the  wealth  taken  from  Tarapaca  was 
able  to  increase  considerably  its  military  power,  never 
complied  with  the  treaty  of  Ancon  wherein  it  might  favour 
Peru.  It  commenced  to  take  possession  of  the  province  of 
Tarata,  adjoining  that  of  Tacna,  and  placed  every  obstacle 
to  hinder  the  establishment  of  the  basis  for  the  realization 
of  the  plebiscite,  which  would  resolve  definitely  the 
nationality  of  Tacna  and  Arica. 

In  the  year  1898  Chile  had  serious  difficulties  with  the 
Argentine,  and  fearing  war  with  this  nation,  consented  to 
sign  the  Billinghurst-Latorre  protocol,  which  established 
the  condition  of  the  plebiscite.  This  protocol  was  ap- 
proved by  Peru  and  also  by  the  Chilian  Senate;  but  as,  in 
the  meantime,  the  conflict  with  the  Argentine  had  been 

54 


arranged,  the  Chilian  Chamber  of  Deputies  refused  its 
approval. 

After  that  Peru  took  repeated  steps  to  established  the 
conditions  of  the  plebiscite;  Chile  not  only  ignored  these 
representations,  but  commenced  in  Iquique,  Pisagua,  Tacna 
and  Arica,  a  campaign  of  persecution  against  Peruvians 
for  the  purpose  of  obliging  them  to  abandon  these  terri- 
tories. 

In  1910  and  1911,  the  Peruvian  schools  were  closed,  and 
Peruvian  priests  were  expelled  by  force,  the  employment  of 
Peruvian  port  workmen  in  Iquique,  Pisagua  and  Arica, 
was  prohibited,  printing  shops  in  which  were  published 
four  Peruvian  periodicals,  were  destroyed,  Peruvian  clubs 
at  Iquique,  Tacna  and  Arica,  were  also  destroyed,  and 
what  were  considered  the  most  representative  Peruvians 
were  compelled  to  leave  these  cities. 

On  the  declaration  of  the  last  European  war,  Chile 
manifested  its  open  sympathy  for  Germany,  and  as  con- 
crete and  notable  evidences  of  that  sympathy,  we  cite  the 
two  following  illustrations:  The  Chilian  authorities  of 
Magallanes  advised  the  German  squadron  of  the  place 
where  they  could  find  the  British  Pacific  squadron,  and 
thanks  to  this  information,  the  latter  was  attacked  and 
sunk  off" the  Chilian  port  ofCoronel;whennewswas  received 
of  one  of  the  German  triumphs  in  French  territory,  a 
portion  of  the  Chilian  army  marched  through  the  streets  of 
Santiago  singing  "Deutschland  ueber  alles." 

Happily,  thanks  to  the  powerful  aid  rendered  by  the 
United  States,  Germany  was  vanquished,  and  as  this 
defeat  signified  for  Chile  the  disappearance  on  its  dreams  of 
imperialism  in  South  America,  it  has  believed  it  con- 
venient to  prepare  to  resist  the  dictates  of  international 
justice,  and  at  the  same  time  that  it  employs  against  the 
Peruvian  resident  in  Tarapaca,  Tacna,  Arica  and  Antofa- 
gasta,  an  arbitrary  .and  cruel  procedure  of  sack,  assault, 

55 


incendiarism  and  assassination,  its  Chancellery  endeavors 
to  deceive  other  nations,  brazenly  denying  these  outrages, 
which  are  public  and  notorious. 

If  your  Excellency  would  condescend  to  send  a  comission 
of  honorable  persons,  proofs  will  be  given  this  commission 
that  Chile  expelled  by  force  the  Peruvian  Consul  from 
Iquique,  and  that  in  this  city  as  well  as  in  Pisagua,  Toco- 
pilla,  Tacna,  Arica  and  Antofagasta,  so  called  "patriotic 
Leagues"  have  been  organized  with  the  purpose  of  insti- 
tuting manifestations  against  Peruvians,  who  are  physi- 
cally assaulted  in  the  streets  and  in  their  houses,  which  are 
sacked  while  under  the  custody  of  soldiers  they  are  turned 
out  of  these  territories;  it  will  be  found  that  the  powerful 
North  American  Company  of  Chuquicamata  has  been 
forced  to  discharge  its  Peruvian  employees  and  operators 
as  have  the  nitrate  railways  of  Iquique  and  Pisagua,  the 
nitrato  oficinas  and  foreign  commercial  houses.  These 
Peruvians  rendered  desperate  by  such  persecutions,  are 
abandoning  their  home,  losing  their  goods  and  properties 
and  arriving  in  Bolivia,  Argentine  and  various  cities  of 
Peru  by  thousands. 

Your  Excellency,  making  the  proclamation  of  principles 
in  your  discourses  to  the  American  Congress  on  the  8th  of 
January  and  the  1 1th  of  February  1918  and  before  the  tomb 
of  Washington  on  the  4th  of  July  of  the  same  year,  has 
shown  himself  as  a  defender  of  humanity;  these  principles 
have  found  a  sympathetic  echo  in  the  heart  of  all  good  men, 
and  we  are  certain  that  they  will  serve  as  the  basis  of  the 
conditions  under  which  peace  will  be  celebrated,  putting 
an  end  to  the  last  war  and  organizing  future  international 
relations  not  only  in  Europe  but  in  the  entire  world. 

Before  the  war  of  1879,  Chilian  territory  did  not  lie 
adjacent  to  that  of  Peru,  and  Chile  never  had  any  right 
over  possession  of  Tarapaca,  Tacna  and  Arica;  it  asked  the 
cession  of  the  first  of  these  provinces  because,  alleging  that 

56 


Peru  did  not  have  the  money  to  pay  an  indemnity  to  com- 
pensate for  the  cost  and  the  sacrifices  imposed  by  the  war, 
the  cession  of  Tarapaca  represented  this  indemnity;  this 
was  expressly  stated  by  the  Chilian  Chancellor,  Mel- 
quiades  Valderrama,  in  the  circular  directed  to  the  diplo- 
matic corps  on  the  10th  of  November,  1880,  manifesting 
the  reasons  which  in  his  opinion  occasioned  the  failure  of 
the  negotiations  of  peace,  which  took  place  in  Arica  aboard 
the  American  warship  "Lakawana." 

Be  that  as  it  may,  Chile  spent  in  the  war  against  Peru 
and  Bolivia  17,000,000  pesos  of  36d,  that  is  2,550,000 
Pounds,  and  has  received  from  Tarapaca  through  taxation 
on  the  exportation  of  nitrate  and  iodine  and  for  sale  of 
guano  and  nitrate  lands,  more  than  a  hundred  and  thirty 
millions  pounds  sterling.  Therefore,  they  have  been  paid 
the  greatest  indemnity  it  was  possible  to  claim,  the  greatest 
paid  up  to  the  present  time,  as  the  result  of  a  war;  nothing 
is  owing  them,  and  in  consequence,  there  is  no  reason  for 
the  retention  by  Chile  of  territories  which  it  claimed  only 
as  a  means  of  securing  an  indemnity  which  it  believed 
pertained  to  it  as  the  victorious  nation. 

In  harmony  with  the  antecedents  set  forth  and  with  the 
principles  proclaimed  by  your  Excellency  we  take  the 
liberty  of  formulating  the  following  petition: 

1. — The  annulment  of  the  treaty  of  Ancon  and  a  conse- 
quent restitution  to  Peru  of  the  territories  of  Tarapaca, 
Tacna  and  Arica; 

2. — That  Chile  be  forced  to  grant  the  Peruvian  resi- 
dents in  the  indicated  territories  the  guarantees  accorded 
by  civilized  nations,  while  restitution  of  these  territories  is 
being  effected. 

(Follow  more  than  one  thousand  signatures  which  cor- 
respond to  only  a  portion  of  the  Peruvians  expelled  from 
Tarapaca,  Tacna  and  Arica,  actually  in  Lima.  These 
signatures,  in  original,  are  being  desposited  in  the  United 
States  Legation.) 

57 


PATRIOTIC  PROTEST  SIGNED  BY  THE  NATIVES 
OF  TARAPACA,  IMMEDIATELY  AFTER  THE 
CHILIAN  OCCUPATION. 

ACT— IN  THE  NAME  OF  THE  LORD. 

The  undersigned,  natives  of  the  department  of  Tarapaca, 
Considering  : 

1st. — That  as  a  result  of  the  fratricide  war  sustained  by  the 
republic  of  Chili  against  Peru,  the  first  named  government 
pretends,  as  an  absolute  condition  for  the  signature  of  peace, 
the  perpetual  transfer  of  our  department  in  order  to  form  a 
Chilian  province,  counting  simple  and  exclusively  with  the 
advantages  that  the  instable  good  luck  of  arms  has  furnished ; 

2nd. — That  the  great  future  reserved  to  the  American  Con- 
tinent rests  precisely  in  the  peace  and  tranquility  that  must 
prevail  in  all  and  each  of  the  countries  forming  it,  under 
which  benefactor  shadow  the  ideas  of  material,  moral  and 
intellectual  progress  that  cause  the  prosperity  of  people,  can 
freely  develop ; 

3rd. — That  the  right  of  conquest  that  the  Chilean  nation 
irrevocably  pretends  to  establish  in  the  International  Ameri- 
can Code,  not  only  destroys  from  its  basis  the  pillar  on  which 
so  far  the  independence  of  each  one  of  the  sovereign  states 
in  which  the  continent  is  divided,  has  reposed,  but  that  re- 
moves far  away  and  for  ever  the  realization  of  a  happy 
future;  said  mournful  right  be  accepted,  in  a  short  time 
America  would  be  converted  into  a  vast  military  camp  and  its 
natives  with  no  other  occupation  than  the  handling  of  arms, 
to  protect  the  independence  of  their  respective  countries,  or 
to  attack  and  enslave  those  whom  they  consider  most  fit  for 
their  ambition; 

4th. — That  the  Political  Constitution  of  Peru,  in  force 
when  the  war  was  commenced,  in  its  article  2nd  reads:  "The 

59 


Nation  is  free  and  independent  and  cannot  sign  any  agree- 
ment to  oppose  its  independence  or  integrity  or  to  affect  in  any 
way  its  sovereignty" ;  therefore,  no  government  has  the  right, 
which  to  the  nation  itself  is  denied,  to  celebrate  agreements, 
by  any  means,  dismembering  the  national  territory ; 

5th. — That  although  in  the  Fundamental  Constitution  of 
the  State  these  principles  of  national  integrity  were  not  stipu- 
lated, and  a  constituent  congress  should  accept  the  exigencies 
of  the  fortunate  invader,  making  cession  of  our  department  to 
save  the  independence  of  the  remainder  of  Peru,  a  treaty  un- 
der such  conditions  would  neither  be  acceptable  for  us; 

6th. — That  the  department  of  Tarapaca  was  not  obtained 
by  Peru  by  means  of  conquest,  purchase  or  spontaneous 
transfer,  but  as  all  the  provinces  of  which  the  republic  is 
composed,  contributed  with  the  blood  of  its  natives  and  all 
kind  of  efforts  to  attain  the  national  independence  in  the 
bloody  and  long  war  that  was  necessary  to  sustain  against  its 
secular  oppressor  the  Spanish  nation ; 

7th. — That  once  Peru  independent,  its  natives  freely  agreed 
the  union  of  its  people  in  one  only  nation,  to  obtain  the  object 
of  all  political  association,  declaring  it  as  "One  and  indivis- 
ible"; 

8th. — That  if  in  the  extremely  unfortunate  case,  Peru  is 
bound  to  accept  as  legal  a  treaty  with  its  invader  in  the  condi- 
tions demanded,  no  matter  who  it  was  and  in  whose  name  he 
would  act,  breaking  off  thus  "in  fact"  the  social  contract  that 
joins  all  the  people  that  form  the  nation,  we  shall  have  the 
most  perfect  right  to  consider  ourselves  loose  from  said  con- 
tract, and  consequently  free  to  make  of  our  sovereignty  the 
use  that  may  suit  us  best ; 

9th. — That  in  case  of  an  unexpected  change  which  occur 
frequently  in  politics,  should  it  be  necessary  to  consult  by 
means  of  a  plebiscite,  or  in  any  other  way,  the  will  of  the  in- 
habitants of  our  department,  to  determine  if  it  may  or  not 

60 


form  an  integral  portion  of  the  Chilian  territory,  it  is  our 
duty  to  declare  at  once,  that  said  consultation  shall  not  be  ac- 
cepted by  us  if  it  is  not  proposed  only  to  the  natives  of  the 
department,  excluding  absolutely  any  person  not  being  born 
within  its  territory. 

For  all  these  and  any  other  considerations  resulting  from 
our  most  perfect  and  indestructible  right;  We  protest  before 
all  nations  of  America  and  the  whole  world  in  our  name,  in 
the  name  of  our  sons  and  in  that  of  the  future  generations; 

1st. — Not  to  recognize  nor  accept  as  valid  any  treaty  that 
Peru  may  sign  in  which  it  be  stipulated  the  transfer  of  our 
department  to  Chili  or  to  any  other  State,  no  matter  what 
Peruvian  government  may  sign  it  or  the  source  from  which 
its  authority  may  spring; 

2nd. — Should  the  event  foreseen  in  the  former  clause  occur, 
we  shall  reassume  our  natural  right  of  sovereignty  to  put  it 
into  force  how  and  when  it  may  suit  us  best,  in  which  case 
we  shall  "in  fact"  remain  free  from  the  social  contract  that 
joins  us  to  Peru ; 

3rd. — Not  to  accept  the  appeal  to  obtain  the  assentment  of 
the  inhabitants  of  our  department,  if  the  opinion  is  not  sub- 
mitted exclusively  to  the  citizens  born  in  their  territory,  who 
are  the  only  ones  that  can  dispose  of  their  future  destiny,  and 
that  it  will  take  place  with  absolute  freedom ; 

4th. — To  remain  faithful  to  Peruvian  laws,  paying  sub- 
mission to  the  resolutions  of  the  legal  authorities,  and  follow- 
ing the  common  future  reserved  to  Peru  in  the  actual  or  in 
any  other  emergency,  so  long  as  the  principle  of  territorial  in- 
tegrity established  in  the  Fundamental  Constitution  of  the 
State,  is  not  violated. 

To  agree  in  its  opportunity  the  way  to  put  into  force  these 
resolutions  giving  them  proper  publicity,  in  conformity  with 
the  events  that  may  develop. 


61 


We  implore  the  protection  of  the  Lord  to  keep  aloft  from 
our  country  and  from  America  the  catastrophies  that  seem  to 
agglomerate  upon  the  continent ;  and  to  avoid  us  the  sacrifices 
of  all  kind  which  we  should  be  compelled  to  face  in  protection 
of  our  most  venerated  rights. 

Tarapaca,  January  1884. 

G.  Arredondo,  Felipe  B.  Romero,  Pedro  J.  Zavala,  B. 
Morales  Bermudez,  E.  Ossio,  Romulo  Penaranda,  Manuel  J. 
de  Loayza,  Juan  E.  Albarracin,  Ildefonso  de  Loayza,  Bruno 
Quiroga,  Alejo  Mollo,  Desiderio  C.  de  Loayza,  M.  Rodri- 
guez, Jose  Mamani,  Emilio  R.  Albarracin,  Ciriaco  Oviedo 
Veliz,  Felipe  C.  Higueras,  Claudio  C.  Albarracin,  Manuel 
Mamani,  Maximiliano  Saavedra,  Jose  R.  Molina,  Belisario 
Santibanez,  Alberto  Santibanez,  Viconte  E.  Rocha,  Mariano 
Alcedan,  Manuel  R.  Rodriguez,  Juan  C.  Albarracin,  Manuel 
Amas,  Luis  M.  Rodriguez,  Guillermo  R.  Rodriguez,  Fer- 
nando Calvo,  G.  Blackadder,  J.  Oswaldo  Aguirre,  Angel  C. 
Beas,  Jose  Manuel  Butron,  Rojelio  Beas,  Andres  Flores,  J. 
Gregorio,  R.  Quiroga,  Jorge,  Garate,  Olegario  Rios,  Segundo 
Barreda,  Gregorio  H.  Okay,  Exequiel  Barreda,  Jose  Cabezas, 
Vicente  Liendo. 

The  signatures  of  all  the  natives  of  the  department,  follow. 


62 


PATRIOTIC  PROTEST  SIGNED  BY  NATIVES  OF 
TACNA  AND  ARICA,  IMMEDIATELY  AFTER 
THE  CHILIAN  OCCUPATION. 

The  undersigned,  natives  of  the  Provinces  of  Tacna  and 
Arica,  Considering: 

First. — That  for  the  purpose  of  putting  an  end  to  the  war, 
waged  between  our  country  and  the  Republic  of  Chile,  a 
treaty  of  peace  has  been  ratified,  in  which  the  latter  nation 
demands  as  an  indispensable  condition  the  possession  for  a 
period  of  ten  years  of  the  Provinces  of  Tacna  and  Arica,  with 
the  proviso  that  at  the  end  of  this  term  popular  opinion  must 
be  consulted  in  order  to  ascertain  through  this  medium 
whether  said  Provinces  are  to  form  an  integral  part  of  Peru 
or  remain  definitely  annexed  to  Chili. 

Second. — That  this  would  signify  to  Peru  the  loss  of  two 
provinces  that  are  solidly  united  to  her  by  powerful  ties  of 
common  interest  and  historic  traditions. 

Third. — That  the  temporary  possession  of  the  Provinces  of 
Tacna  and  Arica,  although  for  a  limited  period,  constitutes 
an  attack  on  the  integrity  of  Peruvian  territory,  an  integrity 
permanently  guaranteed  by  our  Constitution,  and  which  the 
will  of  the  Nation  is  always  ready  to  defend. 

Fourth. — That  the  Republic  of  Chili  has  no  title  whatso- 
ever to  justify  its  pretensions  over  the  Provinces  of  Tacna  and 
Arica,  because  the  victories  obtained  by  her  armies,  by  no 
means,  can  make  her  claim  legitimate  to  the  retention  of  the 
Provinces. 

Fifth. — That  if  a  treaty  has  been  suscribed  to,  such  an 
instrument  has  only  been  entered  into  on  the  part  of  Peru, 
due  to  the  force  of  the  hard  oppression  exercized  by  the 
Chilian  armies,  such  being  consequently  null  and  everything 
therein  stipulated  worthless. 


63 


Sixth. — That  Peru  although  obliged  by  Chilian  arms, 
cannot  transfer  the  inprescriptible  rights  of  collective  per- 
sonalities in  benefit  of  a  nation  alien  by  its  institutions,  to  our 
customs  and  inveterate  traditions,  although  such  a  transfer- 
ence were  even  temporary. 

Seventh. — That  the  treaty  having  been  ratified,  and  on  the 
termination  of  the  period  of  ten  years  occupation  therein  es- 
tablished, the  will  of  the  Provinces  in  question  must  be  con- 
sulted in  order  to  decide  to  which  of  the  respective  Nations 
they  desire  to  belong  to ;  the  natives  of  those  districts  are  the 
only  parties  having  the  right  to  resolve  their  future  in  ac- 
cordance with  their  own  rights. 

For  these  and  many  other  reasons  they  agreed: 

First. — To  solemnly  protest  regarding  the  clause  of  the 
treaty  wherein  was  stipulated  the  possession  of  our  Provinces 
for  ten  years  by  the  Republic  of  Chili,  because  the  clause  in 
question  is  entirely  opposed  to  the  absolute  principles  of 
patriotic  honour,  reason  and  justice  upon  which  the  precepts 
of  international  right  are  based. 

Second. — To  remain  faithful  to  the  Peruvian  nation  ac- 
cepting its  laws,  recognizing  its  legitimate  authorities,  sup- 
porting the  taxes  imposed  upon  us,  and  always  united  to 
Peru  our  country,  to  run  together  the  same  fate  in  the 
future. 

Third. — Not  to  recognize  as  valid  the  resolution  referred 
to  in  the  article  of  the  above-mentioned  treaty,  but  only  and 
exclusively  the  free  expressed  will  of  the  citizens  born  in  our 
Provinces. 

Fourth. — To  take  as  many  measures  as  possible  conducive 
to  the  realization  of  the  former  resolutions,  publishing  the 
present  in  order  that  its  contents  may  become  known  all  over 
the  Republic  and  by  all  the  Nations. 

Tacna,  March  10th,  1884. 


64 


Bruno  J.  Vargas,  Gregorio  Bustios,  F.  Saturnino  Bustios, 
Rigoberto  Molina,  Miguel  J.  Zavala,  Jose  M.  Herrera,  Dr. 
Monge  Ledesma,  Dr.  Guillermo  MacLean,  Juan  MacLean, 
Luis  B.  Arce,  Enrique  Forero,  Manuel  M.  Forero,  Manuel 
Cornejo,  Carlos  Basadre  y  Forero,  Jose  R.  Pizarro,  Neptali 
J.  G.  Zavala,  J.  Oviedo,  E.  Allende,  Guillermo  Vera  Re- 
venga,  Fortunato  Osorio,  A.  Albarracin,  P.  L.  Sotomayor, 
Jose  S.  Bustios,  Javier  Aquiles  Mendes,  Carlos  Zapata,  Julio 
F.  Galvez,  Aristides  G.  Vigil,  Manuel  T.  Maria,  Juan  R. 
Stevenson,  Federico  Arias  y  Delgado,  J.  E.  Barron,  Juan  de 
la  Rosa  Plaza,  Lorenzo  Infantas,  Carlos  Forero,  Pedro  J. 
Portocarrero,  Adan  Vargas,  Federico  Vargas,  Enrique  Landa, 
Felipe  Landa,  S.  Vargas,  Alfredo  Valle-Riestra,  Pedro 
Linares,  Milciades  Cornejo,  Lucas  Paniagua,  F.  M.  Baluarte, 
Valeriano  Albarracin. 

The  signatures  of  all  the  natives  of  the  department,  follow. 


65 


SC»l£  or  M1U$ 
<T         SO  100-      ISO 


UC  SOUTHERN  REGIONAL  LIBRARY  FACILITY 


AA    000  386  036 


i 


